SITTING CONTINUED—FRIDAY 13TH APRIL, 1923.

ARMY AND AIR FORCE (ANNUAL)BILL.

Considered in Committee.

[Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.]

CLAUSE 13.—(Amendment of Section 145.)

The following paragraph shall be substituted for the first paragraph of Sub-section (3) of Section one hundred and forty-five of the Army Act (which relates to the liability of a soldier to maintain his wife and children):
 Where a proceeding is instituted against a soldier of the regular forces under any Act, or at common law, for the purpose of enforcing against him any such liability as above in this Section mentioned, then—

(a) if at the date of service of the process the soldier is quartered out of the jurisdiction of tae court, or (where the proceeding is before a court of summary jurisdiction), out of the potty sessional division in which the proceeding is instituted, the process shall be served on his commanding officer, and such service shall not be valid unless there be left therewith, in the hands of the commanding officer, a sum of money (to be adjudged as costs incurred in obtaining the order or decree, if any order or decree is made against the soldier) of a sufficient amount to enable him to attend the hearing of the case and return to his quarters, and such sum may be expended by the commanding officer for that purpose;
(b) in any other ease the process may be served either on the commanding officer or on the soldier, provided that where the process is served on the soldier, a copy thereof shall he sent by the court by which it is issued to the commanding officer by registered post as soon as possible after the process is served, and in any case at least four days before the day fixed for the hearing of the case:
 Provided that no proceedings in this Section mentioned shall be valid against a soldier of the regular forces if his commanding officer certifies that the soldier is under orders for service beyond the seas, and that in his opinion it will not be possible for the soldier to attend the hearing and return to his quarters in sufficient time to enable him
to embark for such service. Every such certificate shall be sent to the court and shall be final and conclusive.

The following Amendment stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Lansbury:

Leave out the words,
paragraph shall be substituted for the first paragraph of Sub-section (3) of 
and insert instead thereof the words,
 amendments shall he made to.

The CHAIRMAN: This Amendment is unnecessary. in regard to the second Amendment, also in the name of the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury), I suggest that it ought to read somewhat differently.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Lieut.-Colonel Guinness): On a point of Order. I understand that you, Mr. Chairman, have suggested to the hon. Member of Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) that he should move this Amendment in a slightly different form. I want to suggest to him that he should withdraw his Amendment in order that words may be inserted to carry out his object in a more efficient way.

Mr. LANSBURY: I beg to move to leave out the words
paragraph shall be substituted for the first paragraph of sub-section (3) of section one hundred and forty-five of the Army Act (which relates to the liability of a soldier to maintain his wife and children)
and to insert instead thereof the words
amendment shall be made in sub-section (2) of section one hundred and forty-five of the Army Act (which relates to the liability Of a soldier to maintain his wife and children) after the words in respect of a wife or children,' wherever they occur, there shall be inserted the words whether legitimate or illegitimate ' and tire words I and in respect of a bastard child, three shillings,' and in respect of a bastard child. two shillings ' and in respect of a bastard child, one shilling and sixpence,' shall be omitted.
Those alterations simply mean that a child shall not be penalised under the Army Act for any supposed sin of its father or mother. I suppose it will be acknowledged that none of us chose our parents, and if hon. Members remembered that fact when discussing nationality it would be a very good thing. When we are considering the children born within Our own nation we should remember that fact. No child ever asked to be born or
chose its parents, therefore there should never be any disability imposed upon a child legally or morally. During the War we made no discrimination so far as subsistence allowances were concerned, and in these days I think we ought to remove any sort of disability imposed upon a child. I understand that the Minister is going to accept this Amendment, but I do not want to withdraw it until I understand exactly what it is the Minister proposes in its place.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: The form in which you have put the Question, Mr. Hope, fully protects the Amendment which I am to ask the Member for Bow and Bromley to accept. The Question he raised has been before the House on former occasions. It was raised two years ago by the present Minister of Health, and my predecessor made a sympathetic answer. He pointed out that there was little urgency in the matter, because the provisions of the Army Act, although they distinguish between the bastard and the legitimate child, were more generous to the bastard than the provisions of the civil law. But the War Office practice has always been, as far as possible, to put both on an equality. It was done during the War, and I am glad to say for both my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air, and my noble Friend the Secretary of State for War authorise me to accept this Amendment in principle.
I should at the same time point out that it will not in fact have a very large effect, because its operation, in the case of the bastard child, will be limited by the maintenance orders made by the civil courts, and in civil courts, whether for a bastard or for a legitimate child, there is a hard and fast maximum under the present law of ten shillings. My reason for accepting this Amendment is, that apart from the desirability of avoiding any appearance of punishing the child, as the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley pointed out, for the sins of his parents, the Amendment may have some practical effect in increasing the speed with which arrears under these maintenance orders may he paid over. Of course, if Amendments of the Bastardy laws are at any time passed, much wider effect will immediately become possible. I think I
ought to mention one difficulty which occurs about this Amendment. It will be in the recollection of the House that it is not usual on the Committee stage of the Army Act for the Government with any readiness to accept amendments because if no amendments are accepted no report stage is necessary, but I have arranged with the hon. Member and also with the Opposition Whips, that on acceptance of these Amendments will not be used as a pretext for depriving us to-night of that report stage which would not have been necessary if we had refused to listen to argument on this and other matters. If that understanding be agreed to, and if the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley will withdraw his Amendment, I will immediately move an Amendment which covers the same point in a form which I am told is more satisfactory.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has not moved his Amendment on the Paper. The Amendment which he has moved is precisely the one which the hon. and gallant Gentleman is ready to accept.

Mr. TURNER: I should like to know whether the Amendment which is now to be accepted removes the word "bastard" from the Bill. If it does not remove that word, it does not meet the point that I want to see met. The word "bastard" may be a good English word, but it is a very opprobrious epithet indeed to use in connection with children, and I think the word "illegitimate" is the right one to use. Will the word "bastard" be removed by the acceptance of this Amendment?

The CHAIRMAN: The Amendment says that after the words "in respect of a wife or children," wherever they occur—that is to say, in the original Act—the words "whether legitimate or illegitimate ' shall be inserted, and that the words" and in respect of a bastard child," which are repeated three times, shall be omitted.

Mr. TURNER: Thank you.

Mr. J. H. THOMAS: I am afraid there is some mistake about the bargain indicated by the hon. and gallant Gentleman. We appreciate to the full the intention of the Government to make the Amendment as indicated. We believe that they
themselves see the reasonableness of the suggestion. But my hon. and gallant Friend is entirely in error in his intimation that the acceptance of this Amendment binds the Opposition not to take the steps that they may think necessary on the Report stage. No such arrangement has been made nor, indeed, could any arrangement of that kind be made; and, incidentally, may I point out to my hon. and gallant Friend the absurdity of laying down any such condition? Here is an Amendment which the House generally would accept, but, if the proposition now laid down were accepted by any Opposition, the way for the Government to facilitate its business would be to introduce nothing, because then there could not be any Report stage. I only want to make it perfectly clear that there must be some mistake, and that no such bargain as my hon. and gallant Friend intimated has been made.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I think that really there is no substantial difference between us. The point is that we want to get the Report stage as well as the Committee stage to-night. If we are obdurate, there will be no Report stage, because when the Committee stage has been taken on the Floor of the House and no Amendments have been made, no Report stage is necessary. If our getting the Report stage, if necessary, to-night, is objected to, we cannot accept the Amendment here, but I would see if we could get it put in in another place, because I do not wish to make the Amendment suffer, but I would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, if he can, to meet us in this matter, and not to make any undue difficulty about the Report. stage, because, although it does not affect this Amendment, it does affect another Amendment on the Paper, which could not be put in in another place because it is a matter of money.

Mr. THOMAS: I only wanted to correct the mistake. It would have led to complications if it went forth that a bargain had been made and then it was repudiated. I quite understand and appreciate the situation, and only want to make the matter perfectly clear, so that there may be no misunderstanding afterwards.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I understand that the right hon. Gentleman will
not complain if, at the end of the Committee stage, we also take the Report stage to-night?

Mr. THOMAS: Oh, no.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed,

" That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: There is one point that I want to raise on the main Clause. I know that, if there should be any points omitted during the Committee stage, those matters can be discussed on Report stage, to-night, and in any case I do not intend to occupy the time of the Committee for very long. I want to ask the Government a question which happens to affect certain persons in my constituency. In the last Parliament certain legislative steps were taken in conjunction with some of the Dominion Governments—I think with all--about the cases of wives of Colonial soldiers who had been left deserted with their children in this country. The law was clumsy, and steps were taken by Imperial means to facilitate the bringing of these soldiers to book and charging them for the maintenance of their wives and children. I want to ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman whether that has been put into operation, how it is working, whether it has been successful, and what information he can give us upon it. It affects a number of very unfortunate people and I should be grateful for any information.

The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Lieut.-Colonel Sir Samuel Hoare): The procedure to which the hon. and gallant Gentleman has referred has nothing to do with this Act. It is the result of a separate Act of Parliament entirely. All I can tell him is that I understand the Dominions have raised no objection.

Question put, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 14.—(Application, of Act relation to mandated territories.)

After section one hundred and eighty-seven of the Army Act the following section shall be inserted—
 187A. This Act shall apply in relation to any territory in respect of which a mandate on behalf of the League of Nations has been accepted by His Majesty in like manner as it applies in relation to a British protectorate.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I consider this clause unnecessary. We were told on the Second Reading, when the usual passage of arms took place, that it was absolutely necessary to pass the Bill in order that we should have a disciplined Army. It is a-very extraordinary thing that we manage to keep up large bodies of troops in mandated territory—Palestine, Mesopotamia, Kenya Colony, before the Peace Treaty was ratified—without this Clause being added, without the mandated territories being brought within the same legislation as British Protectorates. The Ministry of Air is now affected owing to the great. numbers of aeroplanes badly needed in this country, which are sweltering uselessly in useless parts of the desert. They have managed to maintain discipline and to keep the troops more or less happy and contented all this time without this Clause. What did they do last year or the year before? This is not by any means an idle question. There is a very great question of principle involved. We should be extremely cautious about any legislation with reference to mandated territories.
There has been a great deal of suspicion, I think justifiable, about the British Governments' action—the last Government and this—with reference to these mandated territories, and it was most expressly declared by our representative at Paris, and on the League of Nations that those mandated territories are quite distinct from the British Empire. Thank goodness they are. They give us a means of cutting our loss and saving further expenditure and money uselessly upon them. But the principle is important, that we should proceed very cautiously before we accept this new Clause. The fact of the matter is that our Armies, not only in mandated territories, but in Constantinople, at Chanak, in parts of the world which are even mandated territories, outside the Empire altogether, somehow or other have managed to get along comfortably without this Act applying. Why is it necessary in this case to insert this Clause? On the Second Reading you allowed me to develop the argument somewhat on this question. I could get no satisfactory reply from the Government and now is the opportunity.
If the right hon. Gentleman and the rest of the talent on the Government bench are not able to give me an answer on this stage of the Bill, there is the Report stage, and as the night becomes longer their brains will perhaps become brighter. I shall be happy to have a satisfactory reply.

Sir S. HOARE: I will answer my hon. and gallant Friend. I am afraid, from what he has said, that we shall be deprived of another speech from him on the Report Stage, because I feel sure that I can satisfy him. The object of the insertion of the Clause is simple. At present the army in Palestine, or up to a comparatively recent time ago, was on active service. So long as the army was on active service no question of this kind arose. With regard to what the hon. and gallant Member said about Chanak and Constantinope, discipline has been maintained because the armies are on active service.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Does that apply to the Rhine army also?

Sir S. HOARE: I cannot say off-hand, but I think it is so. In regard to Palestine, the state of the country has become so much more peaceful that some months ago we were able to bring to an end the condition of active Service, and on that account it is necessary to put the military administration in Palestine on the same footing as it would be in a Protectorate. In a Protectorate the High Commissioner has certain powers in connection with courts martial. For instance, it is his duty to confirm the death sentence. Death sentences, I am glad to say, are very seldom given in peace time, but it is necessary to put the High Commissioner in Palestine on the same basis as a High Commissioner in any Protectorate. That is the chief reason for the insertion of this Clause. There are two other additional advantages to be gained by this change. If the change is made it will be possible to imprison military offenders in civil prisons. That is impossible without this Amendment. It will also be possible to proceed in the civil courts against civil persons who unlawfully buy or steal military property. It is wholly owing to these three reasons that this Clause is inserted. The Committee will see that the result of it is to
transfer authority that is now purely in military hands to the civil power. In Mesopotamia the state of affairs is still one of active Service, but as the country becomes more established the condition of active Service will come to an end. In that case this Clause will apply. There is

nothing controversial about the insertion of the Clause.

Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 227; Noes, 132.

Division No. 81.]
AYES.
[11.30 p.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Falcon, Captain Michael
Murray, John (Leeds, west)


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Nail, Major Joseph


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Fawkes, Major F. H.
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Forestier-Walker, L.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Furness, G. J.
Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Nield, Sir Herbert


Banks, Mitchell
Ganzonl, Sir John
Norton-Griffiths, Lieut.-Col. Sir John


Barlow, Rt. Hon. Sir Montague
Garland, C. S.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barnett, Major Richard W.
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Ormsby-Gore. Hon. William


Barnston, Major Harry
Goff, Sir R. Park
Paget, T. G.


Barrie, Sir Charles Coupar (Banff)
Gould, James C.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)


Becker, Harry
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
pease, William Edwin


Senn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
pennefather, De Fonblanque


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Penny, Frederick George


Berry, Sir George
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Halstead, Major D.
Perring, William George


Blundell, F. N.
Hamilton, Sir George C. (Altrincham)
Philipson. Hilton


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Pielou, D. P.


Boyd -Carpenter, Major A.
Harrison, F. C.
pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Brass, Captain W.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hawke, John Anthony
Privett, F. J.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Ralne, W.


Briggs, Harold
Henn, Sir Sydney H
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Hewett, Sir J. P.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Hlley, Sir Ernest
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Brown, Sir James
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Remer, J. R.


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Rentoul, G. S.


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Hohier, Gerald Fitzroy
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Butler, J. R. M. (Cambridge Univ.)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chrtsy)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Hood, Sir Joseph
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Button, H. S.
Hopkins, John W. W.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Rogerson, Capt. J. E.


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Houfton, John Plowright
Rose, Frank H.


Cassels, J. D.
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Cautley, Henry Strother
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hudson, Capt. A.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Chadwlck, Sir Robert Burton
Hume, G. H.
Russell, William (Bolton)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hurst, Lt.-Col. Gerald Berkeley
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Clarry, Reginald George
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Clayton, G. C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cobb. Sir Cyril
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Colfox, Major Win Phillips
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
James, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Sandon, Lord


Cope. Major William
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Shepperson, E. W.


Cory, Sir J. H. (Cardiff, South)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Skelton, A. N.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Smith, Sir Harold (Wavertree)


Croft Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Lorden, John William
Stanley, Lord


Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Lorimer, H. D.
Steel, Major S. Strang


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Lort-Williams, J.
Stephenson, Lieut.-Colonel H. K.


Davies, David (Montgomery)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Lumley, L. R.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Dawson, Sir Philip
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Doyle, N. Grattan
Maddocks, Henry
Sutcliffe, T.


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Manville, Edward
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Edmondson. Major A. J.
Margesson, H. D. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Ednam, Viscount
Mercer, Colonel H.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Elliot. Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Ellis, R. G.
Mitchell, W. F. (Saffron Walden)
Tubbs, S. W.


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Molloy, Major L. G. S.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Waring, Major Walter


Evans, Capt. H. Arthur (Leicester, E.)
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Watts, Dr. T, (Man., Withington)


Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honlton)
wells, S. R.


Eyres Monsell, Com- Bolton M
Murchison, C. K
wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)
Young, Rt. Hon. E. H. (Norwich)


Willey, Arthur
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)



Winterton, Earl
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Wise. Frederick
Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward:
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Wolmer, Viscount
Yerburgh, R. D. T. 1
Gibbs.


NOES.


Adams, D.
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Ritson, J.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Amman, Charles George
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Herrlotts, J.
Saklatvala, S.


Barnes, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. A.


Batey, Joseph
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sexton, James


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Bonwick, A.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Shaw, Thomas (Preston)


Bowdler, W. A.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jones. J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Briant, Frank
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Simpson, J. Hope


Broad, F. A.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromfield, William
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Brotherton, J.
Jowitt, W. A. (The Hartlepools)
Snell, Harry


Buchanan, G.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Buckle, J.
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, H. H. (Bradford, S.)


Burgess, S.
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Cairns, John
Leach, W.
Sturrock, J. Leng


Cape, Thomas
Lee, F.
Sullivan, J.


Charleton, H. C.
Linfield, F. C.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Darbishire, C. W.
Lowth, T.
Thome, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lunn, William
Thornton, M.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
M'Entee, V. L.
Trevelyan, C. P.


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
McLaren, Andrew
Turner, Ben


Duffy, T. Gavan
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Duncan, C.
Marshall, Sir Arthur H.
Warne, G. H.


Dunnico, H.
Maxton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D.(Rhondday


Ede, James Chuter
Middleton, G.
Webb, Sidney


Entwlstle, Major C. F.
Millar, J. D.
Weir, L. M.


Foot, Isaac
Morel, E. D.
Welsh, J. C.


Gosling, Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Westwood, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wheatley, J.


Greenall, T.
Newbold, J. T. W.
White, H. G. (Birkenhead. E.)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Nichol, Robert
Whiteley, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
O'Grady, Captain James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Groves, T.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grundy, T. W.
Paling, W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Wright, W.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Phillipps, Vivian
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Potts, John S.



Hardie, George D.
Pringle, W. M. R.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. T. Griffiths and Mr. Morgan Jones.


Hastings, Patrick
Riley, Ben



Hayday, Arthur

CLAUSE 15.—(Application to Air Force.)

References in this Part of this Act to the Army Act shall be deemed to include references to the Air Force Act, and those provisions shall, in their application to the air force, have effect subject to any of the general modifications set out in Part I. of the Second Schedule to the Air Force (Constitution) Act. 1917, which apply, and also

with the substitution of a reference to "squadron leader" for the reference to "field officer."

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 230; Noes, 124.

Division No. 82.]
AYES.
[11.40 p. m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Berry, Sir George
Brown, J W. (Middlesbrough, E.)


Archer-Shoe, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Bruton, Sir James


Ashley, Lt.Col. Wilfrid W.
Blades, Sir George Rowland
Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Blundell, F. N.
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Bonwick, A.
Butler, J. R. M. (Cambridge Univ.)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Butt, Sir Alfred


Banks, Mitchell
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Button. H. S.


Barlow, Rt. Hon. Sir Montague
Brass, Captain W.
Cadogan, Major Edward


Barrett, Major Richard W.
Brassey. Sir Leonard
Campion, Lieut. Colonel w. R.


Barnston, Major Harry
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Cassels. J. D.


Barrle, Sir Charles Coupar (Banff)
Briggs, Harold
Cautley, Henry Strother


Becker, Harry
Brittain, Sir Harry
Cayzer. Sir C. (Chester, City)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hood. Sir Joseph
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hopkins, John W. W.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Clayton, G. C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Houfton, John Plowright
Remer, J. R.


Colfox, Major Win, Phillips
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Rentoul, G. S.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Cope, Major William
Hudson, Capt. A.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Cory, Sir J. H. (Caidiff, South)
Hume G. H.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Hurst, Lieut-Colonel Gerald B.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Rogerson. Capt. J. E.


Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rose. Frank H.


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Dividson, J. C. C.(Hemel Hempstead)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Russell, William (Bolton)


Dawson, Sir Philip
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Doyle, N. Grattan
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Ednam, Viscount
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Lorden, John William
Sandon, Lord


Ellis. R. G.
Lorimer, H. D.
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Lort-Williams, J.
Shepperson, E. W.


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Skelton, A. N.


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Lumley, L. R.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Evans, Capt. H. Arthur (Leicester, E.)
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Smith, Sir Harold (Wavertree)


Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)
Maddocks, Henry
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Manville. Edward
Spencer, H. H. (Bradford, S.)


Falcon, Captain Michael
Margesson, H. D. R.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Mercer, Colonel H.
Stanley, Lord


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Steel, Major S. Strang


Foot, Isaac
Mitchell, W. F. (Saffron Walden)
Stephenson, Lieut.-Colonel H. K.


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Forestier-Walker, L.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Foxcrott, Captain Charles Talbot
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Furness, G. J.
Morel, E. D.
Sutcliffe, T.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Ganjonl, Sir John
Murchison, C. K.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen. South)


Garland, C. S.
Murray, John (Leeds, West)
Tltchfield, Marquess of


George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Nail, Major Joseph
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Goff, Sir R Park
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Tubbs, S. W.


Gray. Frank (Oxford)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Turion, Edmund Russborough


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Waring, Major Walter


Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. w. E.
Nield, Sir Herbert
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Gwyrne, Rupert S.
Norton-Griffiths, Lieut.-Col. Sir John
Wells, S. R.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Halstead, Major D.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
While, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Hamilton, Sir George C. (Altrincham)
Paget, T. G.
Willey, Arthur


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Winterton, Earl


Harmon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Pease, William Edwin
Wise, Frederick


Harrison, F. C.
Pennefather. De Fonblanque
Wolmer. Viscount


Harvey, Major S. E.
Penny, Frederick George
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Hawke, John Anthony
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Henn. Sir Sydney H.
Perring, William George
Worthington-Evans. Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Philipson, Hilton
Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Pielou, D. P.
Yerburgh, R. O. T.


Hewett, Sir J. P.
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray
Young, Rt. Hon. E. H. (Norwich)


Hiley. Sir Ernest
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton



Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Privett, F. J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Ralne, W.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Hohier, Gerald Fitzroy
Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Gibbs.


NOES.


Adams, D.
Charleton, H. C.
Grundy, T. W.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Darbishire, C. W.
Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Davies, David (Montgomery)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)


Barnes, A.
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Datey, Joseph
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hardle, George D.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Harris, Percy A.


Bowdler, W. A.
Duffy, T. Gavan
Hastings, Patrick


Bowerman, Rt. Hon, Charles W.
Duncan, C.
Hayday, Arthur


Briant, Frank
Dunnico, H.
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)


Broad, F. A.
Ede, James Chuter
Henderson, Rt Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)


Bromfield, William
Entwistle, Major C. F.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Brotherton, J.
Gosling. Harry
Herriotts, J.


Buchanan, G.
Greenall, T.
Hirst, G. H.


Buckie, J.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Burgess, S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Cairns, John
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Johnston. Thomas (Stirling)


Cape, Thomas
Groves, T.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)




Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
O'Grady, Captain James
Sullivan, J.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Oliver, George Harold
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Paling, W.
Thome, W. (West Ham, Pialstow)


Jones, T. I. Marty (Pontypridd)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Thornton, M.


Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Trevelyan, C. P.


Jrwitt, W. A. (The Hartlepools)
Phillipps, Vlvian
Turner, Ben


Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Potts, John S.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Kirkwood. D.
Pringle, W. M. R.
Warne, G. H.


Lansbury, George
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Lawson, John James
Riley, Ben
Webb, Sidney


Leach, W.
Ritson, J.
Weir, L. M.


Lee, F.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)
Welsh, J. C.


Linfield, F. C.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)
Westwood, J.


Lowth, T.
Saklatvala, S.
Wheatley, J.


M'Entee, V. L.
Salter, Dr. A.
White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


McLaren, Andrew
Sexton, James
Whiteley, W.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Shinwell, Emanuel
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Marshall, Sir Arthur H.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercilffe)


Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Simpson, J. Hope
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Maxton, James
Sltch, Charles H.
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Middleton, G.
Smith, T. (Pontefract)
Wright, W.


Millar, J. D.
Snell, Harry
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)



Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Stephen, Campbell
TELLERS FOR THE NOES —


Newbold. J. T. W.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Mr. Ammon and Mr. Lunn.


Nichol, Robert

NEW CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section 42.)

In Section forty-two of the Army Act (which relates to the mode of complaint by an officer), at the end of Section there shall be inserted the words "Such examination shall he delegated by the Army Council to an independent tribunal of three members, of whom at least one shall have had a legal training, and who shall report to the Army Council."—[Mr. G. Hurst.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. GERALD HURST: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
The only object of this Amendment is to pave the way to the improvement of the machinery for the redress of grievances in the Army. I know it is not desirable to encourage appeals to tribunals, nor do I say that the present system is prolific of injustice, but I do say, it being admitted that there should be machinery for the redress of grievances in the Army, it ought to follow that the machinery available should be of the very best character. T think it will be generally agreed that the present system, as laid down by Section 42 of the Army Act, is not the best, and can in no sense be described as judicial machinery at all. If an officer in the Army has a grievance at the present time,-that grievance is transmitted through various General Officers Commanding, who are superior to the officer who makes the complaint, to the Army Council, and the Army Council examines that complaint. The examination is held in secret conclave. It is determined, as I understand, purely by documentary evidence. There is no examination of the complainant or wit-
nesses, and there is no opportunity for cross-examination. It must be clear to anybody that a tribunal of that sort cannot give-the same satisfactory adjudication on a grievance as a tribunal which examines the matter in a proper legal spirit, giving each side a fair and proper hearing. The decision of the Army Council may mean that an officer's career is completely blasted, and that he has no hope of advancement in the future. If such consequences may be involved, I think it will be the wish of everybody that the grievance., whatever it may he, should be heard before the best possible tribunal, and adjudicated upon on the fairest principles.
If the Clause now brought. forward by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Melton (Sir C. Yate) and myself be carried, it will mean that the examination will not be 'carried on in secret by an irresponsible body. It will mean that the examination will be delegated to an independent committee nominated by the Army Council. of which one member. at all events, has had experience with regard to the laws of evidence and legal principles. The advantage of that will be that the complainant will be able to put forward his grievance in person, that he will be able to meet those who are giving evidence against him face to face, and it will also mean that the tribunal which decides the question, which may have the most vital bearing upon an officer's future, is absolutely independent. Not unusually any military body which adjudicates on a grievance has a bias in favour of other
military authorities. One authority will unconsciously or consciously support another authority. But having an independent tribunal, you will get a tribunal which will decide the matter entirely dispassionately and entirely free from all prejudices. Those objects are undoubtedly secured by this Clause. Nobody can say it is subversive of discipline, and it in no way encourages appeals. It does involve two clear results. It will give an absolutely fair hearing before an impartial tribunal, so that the risk of injustice, which I do not say is great now, but is in existence, must become less by reason of having an independent tribunal hearing an appeal on judicial lines.
The second good result is that whether a complaint is well-founded or ill-founded, it is always a satisfaction to a man who has a grievance to know that his complaint has been fairly heard. That satisfaction does not exist in many cases at the present time, and it is because this Amendment—I am not insisting On its particular form—because the spirit of this Amendment does fulfil these two objects that everybody must surely feel it desirable that I move it.

Colonel Sir CHARLES YATE: I beg to second the motion. It has been moved so vividly by my hon. Friend that there is very little left for me to say. I can only say I hope the War Office will take this matter into consideration and will give us hope that some remedy will be applied in the manner we have proposed. I have raised this question before for several years, and I know it is a matter which is very much thought of and considered by the officers of the Service. I have with me this evening two letters, sent to me by generals who have been in high command. I think if I give the Committee a few words of what they have written to me it will show what the feeling is, not only among the junior officers now serving, but among the senior officers who have served. One general—of course, I give no names—says:
 Read Section 42 of Army Act. It is useless to appeal to the King against the Secretary of State for War, because it is he who advises His Majesty, and by our Constitution the King must act under the advice of his Ministers.
He goes on to say:
 Section 42 A.A. places that good, upright, honourable and just man, our Gracious
King, in a very false and embarrassing position.
I think anyone who reads that Section will agree with him. Another General writes to me:
 I have no objection to raise against courts-martial in dealing with officers. It is the treatment of officers by means of reports that is so often unjust, and which calls for reform. So much depends upon the idiosyn-cracy of the Commanding Officer and the General. I remember, when I was in China, we had a very dogmatic and irascible General, who dealt very severely with three young officers. In reference to these the Admiral on the station "—
I will not quote the name—
 said to me, I do not at all like the way you treat your officers in the Army.' We "—
that is the Navy—
 always have a court-martial; it is much more fair.
I think all Officers will agree with him on that. This General Officer goes on to say:
 Officers frequently ask to he tried by court-martial, but it is never allowed.
I ask the Under-Secretary of State for War to take these facts into consideration. No doubt there is a very great feeling in this country. I have here various cases which have been sent to me by those very Generals, of unjust treatment of officers who have served, of which they had personal knowledge during their Commands.
I have asked for the consideration of this particular case several times already and I hope the War Office will now take it into consideration. There is a different rule for the Army and for the Navy, and I agree with the General who wrote to me that the Navy rule is the best. An officer has always to have a court-martial if anything is done. That is not the case in the Army. I hope the War Office will take this matter into consideration. If they will give us a promise that it will be fairly considered we shall be grateful.

12 M.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I think the hon. and gallant Member for Melton (Sir C. Yate) is misinformed as to the practice of the Navy, because there is just the same opportunity of dispensing with the services of officers found inefficient in the Navy, without any court-martial, as there is in the Army. I am afraid that this Amendment—although although I recognise that it has been seconded with great military authority
by a hon. and gallant Member with a long and distinguished military career, as well as with the military experience of the mover, would not, by any means, be overwhelmingly welcomed by the officers of the Army as a whole. The real question is whether the Army Council are to judge grievances, or whether an outside body, such as the hon. Gentleman has proposed, would be any better. What are those grievances? Very often they are confidential reports. These reports have, in all cases, to be shown to the officer concerned, and initialled by him. It is a most unpleasant duty for any senior officer to report adversely on anyone under his command, and when a man feels that he is aggrieved, he can appeal to the Army Council. Three members of the Army Council have to go into this matter, and they have all separately to record their opinions. Both the hon. and gallant and the hon. and learned Gentle men who have put forward the Amendment attach too much importance to the weight of the Appeal Tribunal. An Appeal Tribunal seems to me to be much more useful on matters of law and fact than on matters of opinion; and efficiency, after all, must be a matter of opinion. I am sure that every officer who has suffered from this kind of report feels in his soul that the senior who reported against him is, in the words of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, "dogmatic and irascible." But you have to have some meaning attached to "efficiency." You see the same distinction in civil life where employers, to the public benefit, have the right to deal with inefficiency. In War you have even a greater need for efficiency than in civil life, for not only the national interest, but the interests of the fighting men all depend upon an efficient command. We all know men of the most praiseworthy character who are quite unfit to command troops in an emergency. Some men cannot take responsibility. Some are too slow in the "uptake." Some fail from physical causes, being unable to bear fatigue. A court cannot judge of these matters. They can only really be decided by the superiors of the officer who know the work and strain and have been able to test it and to form an opinion. I must ask the Committee to reject the Clause because as we have got
a small Army we must have an efficient one. I believe that this proposed change would be a serious obstacle to, and a discouragement of, the system of honest confidential reports and of promotion by merit.

Mr. THOMAS: The Mover and Seconder of the Clause will have received the cold comfort of the replies of the War Office with a certain amount of dismay. The remarkable thing is that the Mover of the Clause is a man with war experience, and the Seconder a member with a long military career. We have the right to assume that against the opinions expressed from the box opposite, some consideration should be given to the experience, long and varied, of the two gallant Gentlemen to whom I refer. It is said that the decision of the Under-Secretary is in the interesters of the officers themselves. But we have had quoted not only the opinion of junior officers, but of two distinguished Generals. I hope that at least my hon. Friends will have the courage of their convictions. The Mover of this Clause said he moved it because he not only believed it was right, but he thought that it was in the interests of efficiency and discipline, and the seconder supported it on precisely the same grounds. On this side of the House we believe this is a good proposal and we believe that the War Office will make a profound mistake if they ignor the experience and advice of those two hon. and gallant Gentlemen. I think an opportunity ought to be given to my hon. Friends of testing their opinion in the Lobby, because I am quite sure that they would not have stayed here until this late hour unless they were actuated by a high sense of their duty and responsibility, and unless they thought they were doing something in the interests of the Army and the country. The remarkable thing is that my hon. Friend states that in civil life and in the relationship between employer and employed thus is an innovation. Let me examine that argument for a moment. The railway porter or platelayer who is charged with an offence has the right to appear before an independent tribunal. and state his case if he thinks an injustice has been done to him. Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman going to contend that a British General or a British officer is not entitled to the same consideration as a platelayer. The Mover of
this Amendment said that in this matter he had had some experience.

Mr. HURST: I did not say that.

Mr. THOMAS: Here is a proposal put forward which the Mover and Seconder say is in the interests of the Army, and discipline, and if the Mover has had no experience in this matter at least the Seconder has had experience, and he has quoted the experience of others. I hope that we shall not only have a division but in addition. I trust that many of 'those officers who have expressed privately their view in favour of this Clause will at least show the strength of that opinion in this particular direction.

Major PAGET: I have had some experience in these matters during my early days in the Army, and have been had up before my commanding officer more than once. Nevertheless I do think that there is an enormous feeling among the rank and file of the British army that they have faith in their commanding officers. After all the whole foundation of discipline is not the fear of punishment but the faith and respect which the ranks maintain not only for their superiors but also for their inferiors. Although I admit there are occasional hard cases, I think we must all admit that, hard cases make exceedingly bad laws and that the whole basis of a confidential report is, the matter of opinion. I agree that in cases of misconduct, more justice would be done by holding Courts Martial much more quickly and in granting officers courts martial instead of having them quietly send in their papers. But this would not be affected by the amendment. From an entirely junior officer's point of view, I do not think that any more justice would be done and a very great blow would be struck at the faith of the junior officer which he ought to have, and in 99 eases out of a 100 he has got in his commanding officer. After all, there is always the confidential appeal which the junior officer has to his company commander and the second in command, and they can give an explanation to the Colonel if he has made) a mistake in judging the capacity of a junior officer. There is that wonderful influence which exists in a regiment of public opinion, and that has got a control over a commanding officer as it has over the most junior subaltern.
If the commanding officer did not feel that he had the support of his junior officers, it would le a very bad regiment. There is also a very effective appeal which the junior officer has of asking to have an interview with his Brigadier General. The power which is given him of examining the case is an ample protection for the junior officer.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: I hope the Committee will sec fit to accept this most reasonable new clause. Some of us on this side of the House have been in the Army as well as members on the other side of the House and some of us even to-day hold His Majesty's Commission although we do not think fit to publish it in blue books and directions. I have had some little experience of officers in the army and I have seen some things which make it necessary to bring such a matter as this before the House. It is true that I may not have had the experience of some officers in the Regular Army service, but those who only held commissions during the war had a good deal brought to their notice of the kind of thing which renders such a protection as this really necessary. I remember what happend to a gentleman of my acquaintance, a highly distinguished medical man, who gave his services freely to the country and the Army during the War. He was a great specialist, and was in charge of a hospital in which I was for the time being. One of these high officers came down on a visit of inspection, and he was, in the words of the hon. and gallant Member who seconded the Motion, certainly dogmatic and certainly irascible; and he had us all tailing one behind the other on this visit of inspection—I forget whether it was 25 or 35 officers and non-commissioned officers—behind the brass hat going round the hospital. Finally, although he knew very little about the exceedingly important work of that specialist, he spoke to one who had voluntarily given the best of his knowledge and technical advice to the relief of the men in that hospital and to the work of its organisation, in a manner which many a man, certainly on this side, would not speak to his dog. I remember, too, experiences in other stations in which I was during my service in the Army, and all I can say is that if some officers who held commissions, whether temporary or regular, had to
depend entirely for their careers upon what appeared in confidential reports, it would be a very bad thing for them indeed. I do not mean to say that we did not meet in the Army many excellent. and friendly superior officers, whom I was very glad to meet, and who taught me a great deal; but at the same time we met many who could hardly be. depended upon to give a really square deal to the junior officers under them. It would be only a matter of justice and equity for this Committee to accept such a reasonable Clause as this, and give these men the right to appeal, not to a too democratic tribunal, but to a tribunal, say, of three, appointed by the Army Council itself, and including a representative with legal knowledge. I hope the Committee will accept the Clause.

Captain BERKELEY: I was much impressed by the speech of the hon. and gallant Member for Bosworth (Major Paget). He put a point which we must have before us in considering this matter, but, when he puts forward, as his reason for disagreeing with this Clause, the time-honoured saying that hard cases make bad law, I think he is really going a little too far. It is not really a question of rectifying hard cases, but of taking precautions that hard cases shall not arise. After all, the whole career of a young officer depends entirely upon the opinion formed of him by his commanding officer, and, when a man's career is at stake, I think he is entitled to every precaution for his protection against possible injustice. The Under-Secretary for War said that this Section of the Act really only aimed at weeding out inefficients.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: indicated dissent.

Captain BERKELEY: That was what I understood the hon. and gallant Gentleman to say. Will he repeat what he did say?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I said there was a very large number of cases in which the appeals under the proposed Clause would be appeals against confidential reports; I did not say in all cases.

Captain BERKELEY: I accept that, of course, but, even so, the Section really goes deeper than that. It says that if an officer feels that he has been wronged by
his commanding officer, and if, on due application made to him, he does not receive the redress to which he may consider himself entitled, he may complain to the Army Council. That covers a great deal more than the question of efficiency. It covers every possible cause of friction that may arise between the commanding officer and the subaltern or the captain. I quite agree that if it were a case of expediency in war time it would be an entirely different matter. It is obvious that in time of war the commanding officer, or someone higher, has to arrive at a quick judgment on the efficiency of an officer or the degree of control exercised by him over his men, and it is undesirable that there should be any misunderstanding or delay; but, after all, the purpose of the Army Act is—or at least I hope it is—to apply to peace time as well as war time. We are not at the present moment considering any case of war, and in any case it would be perfectly possible, by introducing words of limitation, to make provision that in time of war this proposed independent tribunal should not function. The proposal seems to me a very reasonable one, and I hope the Under Secretary will reconsider his decision in the matter. I would suggest that, even if he cannot see his way to accept the Clause as it stands, he might consider whether words should not be introduced into the Army Act giving an officer, in these circumstances, the right to appear in person before the Army Council. That might to some extent meet the case which has been raised, and I very much hope that some such proposal may commend itself to the Government.

Mr. HURST: As the principle embodied in the Clause has now been amply ventilated, and the purpose that was in our minds has been carried out, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no!"]

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): I think the hon. Member has not really the leave of the Committee.

Mr. LAWSON: I am sorry that I cannot speak with the same experience of commissioned rank with which many hon. Members have spoken. I am more familiar with what may be described by the words which have on occasion been used by the hon. Member for Mossley (Mr. A. Hopkinson), that is to say, with the work of
mucking out rather Than messing in." I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman was afraid of the fact that a ranker was going to speak on this matter, but as a matter of fact I was going to support the contentions which he put forward. I think the attention of the Committee ought to be drawn to what the hon. Gentleman was asking. In Clause 42 it is laid down quite clearly that an officer, if he is wronged by his commanding officer, may, if he pleases, appeal to the Army Council. What the hon. and gallant Member wants is a sort of independent tribunal. He wants something outside the ordinary Army organisation. I think that is a very good thing. Do hon. and gallant Members understand what they are doing in making a proposal of the kind? I hope the attention of the "Morning Post" will be drawn to this. [HON. MEMBERS: "And the ' Daily Herald.'"1 Yes, it is astonishing how ends meet at some points. Hon. Members are proposing something that is a feature of the Soviet Red army. The only people who have a civilian trial are the soldiers in Russia. I hope the attention of the "Morning Post" will be drawn to that fact. It is a very good thing that. this question has been raised to-night, because we are going to ask, in much graver circumstances, that the ranker should have the same liberty to appeal to an independent tribunal outside the ordinary army organisation. The ranker has to be satisfied with an appeal to the commanding officer, who is not good enough for the officer himself. It would be a very good thing when the ranker is in trouble if he had the right to appeal to an independent tribunal. I have not had the experience of being turned down very much myself by a court-martial, but I have had the opportunity of leaving my cap and stepping over it between the escort. I tried it to see what it was like. As a rule commanding officers are very decent people. There are rankers who have their grievances but I do not think they have many definite complaints against the men under whom they have served, but there are times when they do not get satisfaction. The officer should have an opportunity of appealing to an independent tribunal. We should put a little bit of civilian life into the Army. As a matter of fact, that is what the two hon. and gallant Gentlemen have been asking for. They have been asking for a civilian tribunal. I
think it is a very good thing indeed, because I would like to see that operating and the rank soldier have the same opportunity.

Mr. GAVAN DUFFY: It must. be perfectly obvious to the hon. and gallant Gentleman who represents the War Office that on this side of the House we are very anxious to help him to carry through his vote. He ought., therefore, to accept the very moderate proposal which has been put. The suggestion is not merely made on the ground of expediency, but even apart from the very important question of Army discipline, the question of political expediency, ought to enter into it also. It would be a queer thing if the "Morning Post" to-morrow morning had to record that it was the Labour Members that had to march in force into the Lobbies to support a reform for the officer class of the British Army.

An HON. MEMBER: They went to press at ten o'clock.

Mr. DUFFY: It would be as well if you went at the same time, and we would be freed from an unintelligent interruption. It is alleged that we are essentially a class party. Where would the class party be when this division takes place? We are going to support a Measure of justice for the officer class, because we believe that the proposition has been made in all good faith by a distinguished soldier who is a representative in this House, and seconded by another distinguished soldier, and if they have done that it is because they realise. the time has come for an independent tribunal. May I suggest without knowledge of active service in the field, and in that respect I am on equal terms with most of the hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite. You conducted the War from armchairs, and you were busy making profits during the War. I am not posing as an authority on military law, but as a matter of clear interpretation may I suggest to the hon. Gentleman who represents the War Office that in the Amendment that has been moved there is nothing inconsistent with Section 42 of the Army Act, which reads
 If an officer thinks himself wronged by his commanding officer and on due application made to him does not receive the redress to which he may consider himself entitled, he may complain to the Army Council in order to obtain justice, who are hereby re-
quired to examine into such complaint and (if so required by the officer) through a Secretary of State make their report to His Majesty in order to receive the directions of His Majesty thereon.
I suggest there is nothing inconsistent in that to prevent His Majesty from saying that instead of the secret inquiry going on in the future as hitherto, inquiries which have created scandals from one part of the country to the other, that these scandals should cease, and His Majesty should say that the independent tribunal should be set up. I appeal to the hon. and gallant Gentleman to accept this Amendment otherwise it will be very nasty from their standpoint to see the Labour Party march into the Lobby in support of the Officer class.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I frankly admit at the outset that I have no Army experience.

HON. MEMBERS: Why not?

Mr. MAXTON: What has it to do with you?

Mr. BUCHANAN: May I repeat again I have no Army experience, and may I say the only people who have the right to know why not are the Government of the country at the time. If they thought I should have been in the Army, it was their business, and not the business of the men who asked the question. I am as willing to do my part for the country as you are. [Interruption.] You cannot shout me down. You cannot bully me anyway. You will have to rise a little earlier in the morning, and come from another country. There is nobody for whom I have a greater regard than the hon. Member who is in charge of this Bill. May I remind this Committee that on many subjects which come before this House, all of us at some time or other are as it were, juries on questions of which we have had no experience at all. Large numbers of Members in this House know nothing at all, or practically nothing at all, about agriculture, for instance. They must he the juries on questions that must be discussed on one side or the other. How many of us are frankly ignorant of the Colonial Office But we must listen to the experts and then form our judgment on matters affecting it. I have listened to the experts, to the Mover and the Seconder, and to the reply by the right hon. Gentleman, and I have also listened
to the excellent plea put by the Member who is now sitting below the Gangway. His argument is an argument against. the whole Clause of the Bill. His argument is that the comradeship of the Army is so excellent that no injustice can happen to any officer at all. If that is the case why have any appeal for the officer at all? But you have an appeal, and that shows there is injustice occasionally. But there is another reason why you should be even more careful in this respect. The hon. Member who opposed this Amendment stated that after all in Army life we must have efficiency, and even in ordinary civilian life the inefficients get weeded out, but there is this difference between the two branches. If the foreman or manager in the shop or warehouse is dismissed there are other warehouses and shops in which he can find employment, but if the officer in the Army is dismissed. he has no other alternative employment in which to seek around and look for, and, as a consequence, you must be very careful in the dismissal of the man, as the injustice is far greater than in civilian life. I listened with due respect. to an excellent speech delivered by one of the Liberal Members—I do not know to which wing he belongs.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: One of two wings without a body.

Mr. BUCHANAN: There is one wing that you usually see in the Government lobby, and the other you usually see in the Labour lobby. I do not know to which wing the hon. Gentleman belongs, but he delivered an excellent speech and he put one point which is worthy of consideration. He says in effect that this is too revolutionary a change for the Government to accept, that the persons who moved it are too revolutionary to be even in the Tory party. But, he said, if you cannot accept this Amendment, accept a modest proposal that. would allow the person to appear before the Army Council. Even that modest proposal the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill casts off with scorn. If the House of Commons is going to be of any real service, it must try to look at Amendments with some idea of fairness. We are told that the Amendment. will affect the discipline of the Army. That is the kind of argument used against every reform in the Army. I remember that my father, who was in the Army, and afterwards
had a long connection with the Volunteer Force, used to tell me that in his days in the Army every reform that he could think of was always opposed because it would affect the discipline of the Army. This is the old argument trotted out again. It will not affect discipline. Another thing you must remember is that you can have no discipline unless you have justice. Justice and discipline must. go hand in hand, and that is the effect of the Amendment. I would plead with the hon. and gallant Gentleman who is in charge of the Bill, who is a comparatively young member of the Government, to look on this Amendment with an unbiassed view. It generally falls to the lot of every man who hold office in a Government to introduce certain changes. These changes are usually handed down to future generations associated with his name. I would plead with the hon. and gallant Gentleman to accept the Amendment if for no other reason than that it would be associated with the honourable name which he bears. He has already accepted one Amendment in most generous fashion, and this one would go down to his credit in future years.

Mr. J. HOPE SIMPSON: I intervene in this Debate with some trepidation, as my experience of the Army is confined to the Volunteer Force, in which I served in every capacity from recruit to commanding officer. I join issue with the last speaker. I do not think that justice is at all a necessary element in this; nor do I think that the most severe discipline is in any way the most just. It is quite possible to have very severe discipline with no justice at all. That is not what we want. The history of the Army in the course of the last ten years has proved that it is the desire of the authorities that all grievances should be fairly ventilated, and that every man against whom an accusation is made should have a fair chance of presenting his case. To this end when an adverse report is made on an officer a copy of that report has to be sent to the officer concerned. I am entirely in support of this Amendment. I do not say that it contemplates a civilian tribunal at all. What is proposed is that the examination shall be carried out by an independent tribunal of three members of whom at least one shall have had a legal training. From the wording of the Amendment and from what was said by the Mover and
Seconder, it is proposed that the tribunal should consist of officers of the Army, and it would he perfectly simple to constitute a tribunal of this sort to hear cases as they arise. I join with hon. Members above the Gangway in pressing this Amendment upon the hon. and gallant Gentleman in charge of the Bill. If he cannot see his way to accept it as it stands, it may be possible for him to accept the suggestion that the officer should have a chance himself of approaching the Army Council. it is true there may he difficulties on some occasions. while officers are abroad on garrison duties. It would not be so easy for them to approach the Army Council, but I think it might be easily arranged that an officer might be allowed to come home for the purpose in cases in which complaints are made against him.

Major WARING: When he is on active service?

Mr. SIMPSON: If he was on active service he would not be under these regulations. This is simply a matter for peace service.

Captain HUDSON: Some of the hon. Members above the gangway opposite have a very hazy idea of how the Army works. That is not very surprising if they take very good care not to go into the Army. They say that it will surprise officers in the Army very much when they go into the Lobby on their behalf. I doubt very much if the majority of the officers in the Army want this amendment. I sin personally an officer in the Reserve of the Army.

An HON. MEMBER: The Boy Scouts.

Captain HUDSON: By no means. If I were in the Army I would not want it. The whole point is on what particular question is this independent tribunal to be set up. The whole debate has turned on these confidential reports. Confidential reports on an officer can only be made by somebody who knows that officer extraordinarily well. Supposing he is adversely commented upon. If this is brought before a tribunal of these three people they cannot have the slightest idea of what the real capacity of that officer as an officer is.
There is no earthly good in my opinion in-comparing an officer in, the Army, in his duties, with the performance of a
bricklayer or any other person. The reason is that he has not in the least degree the same duties to perform. The officer is either a good officer or a bad officer. [Laughter.] You may laugh, but if some of you had been in the Army you would know. If you have an independent tribunal it may be proved that an officer has to all intents and purposes, to an outside person, performed his duty well, though he has not got personality or power of leadership to make him a good officer and may, therefore, have been adversely commented upon. I consider it is obvious that Members opposite do not know anything about this from their very senseless interruptions. If they did know anything about it they would know that powers of leadership and personality count for everything.
One hon. Member raised the point that he wished this particular Amendment to apply to private soldiers. To anybody who has not been in the Army it is difficult for them to know that the discipline of the Army is kept, up by the officers, and also by a system by which, for small offences, men are brought before the officers and given very small punishments. That keeps up the discipline of the Army. Probably to Members opposite it may be ridiculous to know that a man may be punished because he has a button off his coat or a button off his trousers, or even because he needs a hair cut. It is these small things which do make for the discipline of the Army. It is all very well to say that a soldier should have his right to appeal to a civil tribunal for things like that. I think if you got that we might get on the Russian lines and try the Red Army system.[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] I am sorry to hear the Members opposite cheer the Red Army, as they have said they do not admire the Russian system. I am not sure T did not. hear the Red Flag sung yesterday. [Interruption.] I understand from Members who have been in the House in previous years that this Amendment has been known as a "hardy annual," which is, I believe, always withdrawn. I am certain officers of the Army do not want this Amendment, and if you vote against the Government the officers will not thank you. They will think, as they always do. [Interruption.] If they want anything they will not come to the Socialist Labour party and ask them to give it them.

1.0 P.M.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: I am tempted to endorse the remarks made from these benches, that it is to me a great regret that the hon. and gallant Member for Islington (Captain Hudson) did not continue his speech and give us at greater length some knowledge with regard to what has transpired for many years in this House with regard to this Amendment, which he says has been withdrawn upon every occasion. But. I am dealing very seriously with this case, though we are indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for introducing a great deal of amusement and treating this matter lightly. I wish to assure him that if his knowledge of the Army is not greater than he has shown of the history of this matter in the House, it is not very valuable. It is more than interesting and peculiar that upon each occasion officers who have had ripe experience of the difficulties, injustice and hardship to young officers, especially by the whims and caprices of commanding officers, have supported the Amendment. I know of young officers—I am speaking with some experience, and I am saying this quite seriously. I have had some experience of the Army, both in peace and war, for twenty-five years, and I have known young men broken after they have spent a good deal of the early part of their Eves in training themselves for the Army, and then being cast on the scrap heap, so that for many years afterwards they are of no value to themselves or to the nation. I can, therefore, understand the Mover and the Seconder once more making an attempt to secure that at least a court of appeal should be provided. What can there be said against a court of appeal being provided against commanding officers. I speak as one who has had some slight experience—I hope equal to the hon. and gallant Member—during the Great War. I have found in many cases, even during the Great War, circumstances which ought at least to warrant that this Amendment should have consideration and sympathy. I found a number of cases where, if redress of wrongs as provided in this Amendment had existed, many young men whose reputation went by the board would have been saved, and I wish to join in the appeal which is made. I want to point oat that there is nothing wrong in the establishment of this tribunal, whereby the officer who thinks he has not been properly dealt
with can make an appeal. This section, as many other sections of the Army Act has not been changed at least during the last 35 years. If you look at the Act of 1881 and 1885—

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: It has been amended during the reign of King Edward and during the present reign.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: Not to any appreciable extent as far as establishing any further Court of Appeal. Outside the commanding officer's confidential report itself, he has no right of appeal at all. If you look at the Acts of 1881 and 1885, it was precisely, except that there are some words added, in its main provisions what it stands to-day. It was brought home to me very forcibly during the war. I was moving about a great deal in several of the zones in which our operations were carried out and I found that young officers were being proceeded against very unduly. We are living in days when, if you want the best out of men, you ought to give them reasonable security or to allow them to have all the opportunities of either proving their case or of going by the board after this tribunal has considered and examined the evidence, so that they might know fully and upon what grounds they have been charged either for inefficiency or anything else. Then they nor anyone else can have a word to say against the decision arrived at. What I do protest against and protest strongly is—and at least this side of the House will go into the division lobby to mark its disapproval—that no effort is being made that whenever an inquiry into the conduct of an officer is concerned it should be made in the light of day, above board, and without any suspicion at all. There are commanding officers who are liable to do wrong, and the young officer, when charged with an offence should have the satisfaction of knowing that at least he has had fair play to the fullest possible extent that he can have in this country.

Sir S. HOARE: I do not want to take the time of the Committee, but I think my hon. and gallant Friend is under a misapprehension. He seems to think that there is no appeal. There is an appeal and a very definite appeal. Any officer can appeal to the Army Council or to the Air Council. If he appeals to the
Army Council or the Air Council he has the right, so I am informed, of actually interviewing a member of the Army Council or of the Air Council in certain serious cases—in cases, for instance, in which he may be required to resign. He has the right, so I am informed, of actually seeing

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: Under Statute?

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: should be very much obliged to know under what regulation.

Mr. J. H. THOMAS: Will the right hen. Gentleman tell us whether the information he has now given us is provided by Statute, and, if so, how it did not apply to the very notorious case we discussed clay after day in this House of young Barrett and Mrs. Cornwallis West? There was a case where a young officer was absolutely and completely ruined. The hon. Member for Mansfield, the late Sir Arthur Markham, day after day in this House raised that case, and there-came such a storm of protest in the country that an investigation was made and the late Member for Anglesey, Brigadier-General Sir Owen Thomas, was empowered to make the investigation. The young lad was vindicated. The whole position would have been saved if a tribunal had been in existence. That is one case. There is another case that applies to a lady where the same circumstances arose. Miss Douglas Pennant was dismissed on the ground of inefficiency. There was no appeal and the Prime Minister, owing to the influence that. was brought to bear, had to set up a special committee of investigation. This would have been avoided if the proposal we are now making had existed. Here is a proposal made not from this side of the House, because I want to make it perfectly clear that there are Motions coming up of vital importance that we ourselves are moving—but here is a proposal made by two responsible officers, a proposal not made in this House for the first time, but made year after year, reflecting not only their individual opinions but the opinion of officers in the Army. I only want to remind my hon. and gallant Friend that he himself would not pit his experience against the Member who seconded this motion or against the two generals quoted by my hon. Friend. But what is more significant is this, that a statement
has now been made that there is a right of personal appeal. Is it provided by Statute? I want the hon. Member to apply himself to the many arguments that have been adduced. We have been debating this for an hour and a half, and I would appeal to my right hon. Friend to give full consideration to this matter and to remember that we are dealing with something that affects the future and the lives of those people, and we are entitled at least to see that justice is done to them.

Sir S. HOARE: I only gave way to the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. SIMPSON: May I ask whether this right of appeal applies to complaints under this Section of the Act?

Sir S. HOARE: I have had the opportunity of conferring on the statement I made to the Committee. I find that Section 255a of the King's Regulations states that if an officer is called upon after the date of this order to retire or resign his commission he may after submitting an application through the usual military channels immediately be accorded an interview with a member of the Army Council in order that he may have an opportunity to state his case if he so desires. Further than that, in every case where he feels aggrieved he can appeal, though not in person, to the Army Council. This is a very important question and one wishes to remove any possibility of injustice, but I do feel most strongly that an appeal to the Army Council is really much fairer to the officer than an appeal to a special tribunal such as is described in this Amendment.

Mr. THOMAS: The Army Council first deals with it. This proposal is to ensure an impartial consideration: that. is to say the tribunal must consider the case, free itself from any responsibility in it.

Sir S. HOARE: I want to avoid any possibility of injustice, but I disagree with the right hon. Gentleman if he thinks that the Army Council or the Air Council is a partial body. I hold it is a much better body to deal with a case of this kind, for the reason that it knows all the officers concerned in a particular case. It knows something about the commanding officer who originally reported unfavourably on a young officer.
That in itself is a very valuable thing, and a tribunal of that kind is much more likely to take an impartial and merciful view than an outside tribunal.

Mr. THOMAS: Is that not exactly the reverse of the Barrett case? Barrett was a young lieutenant who was dismissed by an officer. The case was ultimately investigated and those responsible knew the officer that had created the injustice, but notwithstanding all that machinery it was proved that a wicked injustice had been done, and that boy's life had been blasted, and he died. If an independent tribunal had been in existence we believe that would have been prevented.

Sir S. HOARE: I am afraid I cannot carry my mind back to the Barrett. case, but the right. hon. Gentlemen and I disagree, and there is no use disguising the fact. I hold strongly the view that the Army and Air Councils are independent bodies which is much more likely to be impartial and merciful to the young officer, than some outside tribunal. That is the whole case of the Government. Having said that, I venture to suggest to the Committee that we have had a very full debate. [HON. MEMBERS "No! "] I suggest that. while we are quite ready to discuss this or any other question, it would be a good thing to get on to the many other Amendments, and I therefore ask the Committee to let us come to a decision on this question.

Mr. EDE: I desire to say a few words on this Amendment and I should like first to deal with the last point made by the right hon. Gentleman who replied for the Government. I feel as one who was wearing His Majesty's uniform before the right. hon. Gentleman who spoke opposite was born, and who was in the National Reserve at the outbreak of war, and who came up at once and served until after the Armistice, that his view of discipline is one I do not hold, and one that tended very considerably to lengthen the late War. I feel as one who has had experience of the Army, that the proper thing to do is to insure for these officers a tribunal in which at least one Member has not soaked in the old Army tradition. There must be many hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the Committee, who were officers in the Territorial Army at the outbreak of war, and they know how they were unable, in spite of long experience, to break through the
cast-iron traditions of the officers of the Regular Army. We had our attention drawn to the fact from time to time that no officer of Territorial experience had managed to rise to any very high office in spite of the marvellous work the Territorials did during the War. If we are to test the real efficiency of the Army, we must have it open to the reception of new ideas among the officers, and there is a general feeling that I have heard voiced by officers in the Army and after they have left the Army, that new ideas are not too readily accepted and men who have new ideas are not too readily welcomed by those holding the old army traditions. I applied twice for a commission during the War. I applied to the Lord Lieutenant of the county for a commission. was his colleague on the County Council.

The CHAIRMAN: I do not see how the hon. Member connects this with the question of an independent tribunal.

Mr. EDE: I was trying to support the argument with which I started that it was necessary to have an independent tribunal so as to break with the old tradition. The question that was asked me was how much of my private income I would be prepared to devote to the commission. I do feel if you have an army based on a tradition like that, if we are going to get real justice for an officer with new ideas that we are riot going to get it if he has to go in front of such a tribunal as that, and. I totally dissent from the argument used by the hon. Member for Islington with regard to the question of discipline. He pointed out the necessity of preserving the old British tradition, and that dirty buttons are a sign of bad discipline.

Is the French Army badly disciplined? Did the French Army bother about shining their buttons during the war? I was attached to the French Army during the war, serving under British officers, and no one worried whether a man was shaved or not. I suggest that if we are to get a really efficient army we are only going to get it by encouraging men of independent thought. to enter the corn-missed ranks, to let them feel that if they have ideas of their own they will be able to work them out, and will not be up against the cast-iron spirit that has too long kept the British army the preserve of one class, and one set of ideas.

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Bridgeman): rose in his place, and claimed to move," That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

Mr. THOMAS: (seated and covered)
I desire your ruling on the decision to accept the Closure moved by a Minister who has not heard the important points raised by the Debate, and is not aware that no answer has been given to the many important subjects raised.

Mr. LANSBU RY: (seated and covered)
I wish to ask, Mr. Hope, what the position of affairs is just now. Nobody here is able to say.

The CHAIRMAN: The Question is "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 194; Noes, 118.

Division No. 83.]
AYES.
[1. 22 a.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Briggs, Harold
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Brittain, Sir Harry
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)


Amery, Ht. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Bruton, Sir James
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)


Baild, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)


Ballour, George (Hampstead)
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Dawsun, Sir Philip


Banks, Mitchell
Butt, Sir Alfred
Doyle, N. Grattan


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Button, H. S.
Du Pre, Colonel William Baring


Barnston, Major Harry
Cadogan, Major Edward
Edge, Captain Sir William


Becker, Harry
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Edmondson, Major A. J


Berry, Sir George
Cassels, J. D.
Ednam, Viscount


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn, J. A. (Birm., W).
Ellis, R. G.


Blundell, F. N.
Clarry, Reginald George
England, Lieut.-Colonel A.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Clayton, G. C.
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Erskine-Boist, Captain C.


Brass, Captain W.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)


Brassey. Sir Leonard
Colvin, Brig. General Richard Beale
Eyres-Monseil, Com. Bolton M.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Cope, Major William
Falcon, Captain Michael


Falle, Major sir Bertram Godfray
Lorimer, H. D.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Lort-Williams, J.
Rogerson, Capt. J. E.


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Forestier-Walker, L
Lumley, L. R.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Furness, G. J.
Manville, Edward
Husselt, William (Bolton)


Garland, C. S.
Margesson, H. D. R.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Mercer, Colonel H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey. Farnham)


Golf, Sir R. X.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J,
Sanders, Rt- Hon. Sir Robert A.


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Sandon, Lord


Gwynne, Rupert S.
Moreing, Captain Aigernon H.
Shepperson, E. W.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Morrison-Bell, Major A.C.(Honiton)
Skelton, A. N.


Halstead, Major D.
Murchison, C. K.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Nail, Major Joseph
Somervllie, A. A. (Windsor)


Harrison, F. C.
Newman, Cofonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Harvey, Major S. E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Stanley, Lord


Hawke, John Anthony
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Steel, Major S Strang


Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Nield, Sir Herbert
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Norton-Griffiths, Lieut.-Col. Sir John
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Herbert, Oennis (Hertford, Watford)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Sutcliffe, T.


Hiley, Sir Ernest
Paget, T. G.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Pease, William Edwin
Titchfield, Marquess of


Hohier. Gerald Fitzroy
Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Penny, Frederick George
Tubbs, S. W.


Hood, Sir Joseph
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Hopkins, John W. W.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Waring, Major Walter


Hopkinson, A. (Lancester, Mossley)
Philipson, Hilton
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Houfton, John Plowright
Pielou, D. P.
Wells, S. R.


Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Pownall, Lieut-Colonel Assheton
White, Col. G. D. (Southport)


Hudson, Capt. A.
Privett, F. J.
Willey, Arthur


Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Raine, W.
Winterton, Earl


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Wise, Frederick


Jarrett, G. W. S.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Wolmer, Viscount


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


King, Capt. Henry Douglas
Renter, J. R.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Rentoul. G. S.



Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Reynolds, W. G. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


Lloyd-Greame. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)



NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)


Barnes, A.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Oliver, George Harold


Batey, Joseph
Hardie, George D.
Paling, W.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hastings, Patrick
Parkinson, John Allen (Winan)


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Hayday, Arthur
Pattinson, S. (Korncastle)


Bonwick, A.
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Phillipps, Vivian


Bowdler, W. A.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Potts, John S.


Broad, F. A.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Pringle, W. M. R.


Bromfield, William
Herriotts, J.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Brotherton, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Riley, Ben


Buchanan, G.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Ritson, J.


Buckle, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Burgess, S.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Saklatvala, S.


Cairns, John
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sexton, James


Cape, Thomas
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Darbishire, C. W.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Davies, David (Montgomery)
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Simpson, J. Hope


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kirkwood, D.
Sitch, Charles H.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lansbury, George
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Lawson, John James
Snell, Harry


Duffy, T. Gavan
Leach, W.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Dunnico, H.
Lee, F.
Stephen, Campbell


Ede, James Chuter
Linfield, F. C.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Lowth, T.
Sullivan, J.


Foot, Isaac
Lunn, William
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Gosling, Harry
M'Entee, V. L.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Pialstow)


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
McLaren, Andrew
Turner, Ben


Greenall, T.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Marshall, Sir Arthur H.
Warne, G. H.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Watts-Morgan, Lt. Col. D. (Rhondda)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth. Pontypool)
Maxton, James
Weir, L. M.


Groves, T.
Middleton, G.
Welsh, J. C.


Grundy, T. W.
Morel, E. D.
Westwood, J.




Wheatley, J.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)



White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Whiteley, W.
Wright, W
Mr. Morgan Jones and Mr. Ammon.


Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)



Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)

Mr. LANSBURY: On a Point of privilage, Mr. Hope —

Question put accordingly "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 124; Noes, 188.

Division No. 84.]
AYES.
[1.32 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hayday, Arthur
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Barnes, A.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Riley, Ben


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Ritson, J.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Lelth)
Herriotts, J.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Hirst, G. H.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Bonwick, A.
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Saklatvala, S.


Bowdler, W. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Salter, Dr. A.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sexton, James


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Brotherton, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Shlnwell, Emanuel


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Buckle, J.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Simpson, J. Hope


Burgess, S.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sitch. Charles H.


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Cairns, John
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Snell, Harry


Cape, Thomas
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Charleton, H. C.
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Darbishire, C. W.
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Davies, Oavid (Montgomery)
Leach, W.
Sullivan, J.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lee, F.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Linfield, F. C.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Lowth, T.
Turner, Ben


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lunn, William
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dunnico, H.
M'Entee, V. L.
Warne, G. H.


Ede, James Chuter
McLaren, Andrew
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col D. (Rhondda)


Edge, Captain Sir William
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow. Govan)
Weir, L. M.


Entwistle, Major C. F,
Marshall, Sir Arthur H.
Welsh, J. C.


Foot, Isaac
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'd'ne, E.)
Westwood, J.


George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Maxton, James
Wheatley, J.


Gosling, Harry
Middleton, G.
White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Morel, E. D.
Whiteley, w.


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Greenwood, A, (Nelson and Colne)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grenlell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Newbold, J. T. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Oliver, George Harold
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Wright, W.


Grundy, T. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)



Hall, F. (York. W. R.. Normanton)
Philliopps, Vivian
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Philipson, Hilton
Mr. Amnion and Mr. Morgan Jones.


Hardle, George D.
Potts, John S.



Hastings, Patrick
Pringle, W. M. R.



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles.
Brittain, Sir Harry
Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Brown, Brig.-Gen, Clifton (Newbury)
Curzon, Captain viscount


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Bruton, Sir James
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Baird, Rt. Hon, Sir John Lawrence
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Doyle. N. Graltan


Balfour, George (Kampstead)
Butt, Sir Alfred
Du Pre, Colonel William Baring


Banks, Mitchell
Butlon, H. S.
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Barnott, Major Richard W.
Cadogan, Major Edward
Ednam, Viscount


Barnston, Major Harry
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)


Becker, Harry
Cassels, J. D.
Ellis, R. G.


Berry, Sir George
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
England, Lieut.-Colonel A.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Clarry, Reginald George
Erskine-Bohn. Captain C.


Blundell, F. N.
Clayton, G. C.
Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Falcon, Captain Michael


BoydCarpenter, Major A.
Collox, Major Wm. Phillips
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray


Brass, Captain W.
Colvln, Brig-General Richard Beale
Fawkes, Major F. H.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Cope. Major William
Ford, Patrick Johnston


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Courthope. Lieut-Col. George L.
Forestier-Walker, L.


Briggs, Harold
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot


Furness, G. J.
Lumley, L. R.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Garland, C. S.
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Goff, Sir R. Park
Manville, Edward
Russell, William (Bolton)


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Margesson, H. D. R.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Mercer. Colonel H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Guinness, Lieut-Col. Hon. W. E.
Mocre, Major-General Sir Newton j.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Gwynne, Rupert S.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Sandon, Lord


Halstead, Major D.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Shepperson, E. W.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Skelton, A. N.


Harrison, F. C.
Murchison. C. K.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Harvey, Major S. E.
Nail, Major Joseph
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hawke, John Anthony
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Newman. Sir R. H. S. U. L. (Exeter)
Stanley, Lord


Henn, Sir Sydney H
Nicholson. Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Steel, Major S. Strang


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Nield, Sir Herbert
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Norton-Griffiths, Lieut.-Col. Sir John
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Hiley, Sir Ernest
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sucter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Sutcliffe, T.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Paget. T. G.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Hohier, Gerald Fitzroy
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pease, William Edwin
Titchfield, Marquess of


Hood, Sir Joseph
Pennefather, De Fonblanaue
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hopkins, John W. W.
Penny, Frederick George
Tubbs, S. W.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Houfton, John Plowright
Perkins, Colonel E. K
Waring, Major Walter


Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Pielou, D. P.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray
Wells, S. R.


Hudson, Capt. A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Privett, F. J.
White. Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Raine, W.
Willey, Arthur


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Winterton, Earl


Keiley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Wise, Frederick


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Remer, J. R.
Wolmer, Viscount


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Rentoul, G. S.
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Reynolds, W. G. W.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)



Lorimer, H. D.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Lort-Williams, J.
Rogerson, Capt. J. E.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


Loyd, Arthur Thomas-(Abingdon)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.

Mr. LANSBURY: Before I move my new Clause I wish to raise a point of Order, and to ask you. Mr. Chairman, whether it is in order for an bon. Member to raise a point of Order while a Motion is being put, and what is the proper procedure to adopt. I felt I adopted the right procedure by sitting down and putting on a hat, and at the top of my voice trying to gain your attention, but you refused to see me. I should be very much obliged if you would tell me what is the procedure.

The CHAIRMAN: The procedure adopted on the last occasion was the wrong procedure, because the hon. Member rose to his feet uncovered. On a previous occasion the procedure adopted by the hon. Member was the right procedure, but the point he raised was of a frivolous nature, and no ruling was called for.

Mr. LANSBURY: Excuse me, Sir, but you made a mistake, if you will allow me to say so with respect.

The CHAIRMAN: I must ask the hon. Member to move his Amendment.

Mr. THOMAS: Do you consider an action frivolous which call attention to the importance of a Debate in which nearly twenty Members took part. The Minister who moved the Closure was not present to hear this Debate and therefore was not a judge as to the-arguments used or the necessary action. Do you consider you are justified in laying down that no answer from you is necessary to a protest made, on these grounds?

The CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Gentleman is now putting a different question. When I spoke of frivolity, I was referring to the objection taken by other hon. Members. I think as a point of Order it applies to him, too.

Mr. LANSBURY: I to raise a point of Order. I put on a hat on the second occasion and sat down. [Interruption.] Excuse me, unless you are going to help to maintain the privileges of individual Members, there cannot be any order ill the place. Mr. Hope, you did not hear my point of Order. You refused to hear me, and that is the point I am raising. I am not raising whether my point was good or bad. You did not
hear it because I never put it. You did not allow me. You waved your hand and turned aside.

The CHAIRMAN: I did not observe the hat on the hon. Member's head the second time. I had observed him rising.

Mr. BARKER: You never looked.

The CHAIRMAN: If subsequently the hon. Member obtained possession of the hat, I did not see him.

Captain BENN: I understand from the Standing Orders that a Member must be covered if he raises a point of Order while a Division is in progress. That is in paragraph 136 of the Manual. Do you rule that the hon. Member, who raised a question after the Division took place, and after the next Amendment was called, was raising a point of Order during a Division?

The CHAIRMAN: The Division was a Closure Motion, which must be taken at once.

Captain BENN: The paragraph in the Standing Order says:
 Whilst a division is proceeding a Member may speak on a point of Order arising out of or during the division, but if ho does so he must speak sitting and covered.
I submit that no Division was proceeding.

The CHAIRMAN: I think it was in fact proceeding. When the Closure is taken, the Division on the Closure and the subsequent Division are one process.

Mr. LANSBURY: I only want to say what 1 have said many time before in this House—that I think the rulings one gets on these points are bewildering. I read the rules of this House, and I have been here a good long time, at one period and another, and I see fresh rulings every day, rulings which simply contradict one another. The Amendment I now move is one which I have handed in by manuscript.

The CHAIRMAN: The Amendment I have called upon the hon. Member to move is that appearing on the paper in the name of himself and another Member. and is an Amendment to Section 44.

Mr. LANSBURY: I have one, for Section 43.

The CHAIRMAN: That will not come before the one I indicated, Before I
consider manuscript Amendments as to whether I should accept them or not I consider the Amendments upon the paper.

Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: When an Amendment is handed in in the ordinary course of a debate on a question before this House, is it not the practice to take the Amendments in their proper sequence—both new Clauses and Amendments to Clauses. For instance, where the Clause is 41, is it not the practice to take next an Amendment to the subsequent Clause 42?

The CHAIRMAN: Yes, in Amendments to a Bill before the House, but these are new Clauses, and new Clauses may amend existing law. For the purpose of procedure, they are new Clauses and must be taken in the order in which they are on the Paper.

Mr. LANSBURY: I do not mind the order in which they are taken.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section 44).

In Section forty-four of the Army Act (which relates to scale of punishments by courts-martial), after the word "flogging," in Sub-section (5) thereof, there shall be inserted the words "and other than personal restraint by being kept in irons or other fetters," and the words" and such field punishment shall be of the character of personal restraint or of hard labour," in the same Sub-section shall be omitted, arid the words "and such field punishment may be of the character of hard labour" shall be inserted in lieu thereof.—[Mr. Lansbury.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. LANSBURY: I beg to move, "That the Clause he read a Second time."
I do not agree with hard labour—[Laughter]—and I understand nobody on that side does either, or with any kind of labour. I move the Amendment in this form because I think it necessary that we should get a fair and square discussion on this subject. Before going on further I would like to read what punishments may be inflicted on a soldier in the Army or an officer. Perhaps I may omit those for an officer. [HON. MEMBERS: "Not at all."] In the case of officers the penalties are death; penal servitude for a term not less than three years; imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a term not exceding two years; cashiering; dismissal from His Majesty's service; forfeiture in the prescribed manner of seniority of
rank, either in the Army or in the corps to which the offender belongs, or in both, or in the case of an officer whose promotion depends upon length of service, forfeiture of all or any part of his service for the purposes of promotion; reprimand or severe, reprimand. In the case of soldiers: Death; penal servitude for a term not less than three years; imprisonment with or without hard labour, for a term not exceeding two years; detention for a term not exceeding two years—anti this is in Section (e)—discharge with ignominy — I have often wondered what hell meant; in the case of a commissioned officer in His Majesty's service it means forfeiture in the prescribed manner, of seniority of rank, or reduction to a lower grade, or to the ranks; in the case of a non-commissioned officer, reprimand or severe reprimand and forfeiture, fines and stoppages. It is further provided that:
 Where in respect of any offence under this Act there is specified a particular punishment or such less punishment, as is in this Act mentioned, there may be awarded in respect of that offence, instead of such particular punishment (but subject to the other regulations of this Act as to punishments, and regard being had to the nature and degree of the offence) any one punishment lower in the above scales than the particular punishment:
(1a) For the purposes of commutation and revision of punishment, detention shall not be deemed to be a less punishment than imprisonment if the term of detention is longer than the term of imprisonment:
(2) An officer shall be sentenced to be cashiered before he is sentenced to penal servitude or imprisonment:
(2a) The Army Council may restore the whole or any part of any lost seniority or forfeited service in the case of an officer who may perform good or faithful service, or who may otherwise be deemed by the Army Council to merit such restoration:
(3) An officer or a non-commissioned officer when sentenced to forfeiture of seniority of rank may also be sentenced to reprimand or severe reprimand:
(4) A soldier when sentenced to penal servitude or imprisonment may, in addition thereto, be sentenced to be discharged with ignominy from His Majesty's service:
(5) Where a soldier on active service is guilty of any offence; it shall be lawful for a court-martial to award for that offence such field punishment, other than flogging, as may be directed by rules to be made from time to time
by a Secretary of State, and such field punishment shall he of the character of personal restraint or of hard labour, but shall not be of a nature to cause injury to life or limb.

The CHAIRMAN: Now that the hon. Member has come to the actual Section I think he must confine his argument to that.

Mr. LANSBURY: If you will allow me to read the next one it will round them all off—
(6) In addition to or without any other punishment in respect of an offence committed by a soldier on active service, it shall he lawful for a court-martial to order that the offender forfeit all ordinary pay for a period commencing on the day of the sentence and not exceeding three mouths.
I think the House would take a very wise course if it really wiped out, the whole of these punishments that I have read, and drew up a few quite simple rules and punishments, and allow the ordinary man in this House to understand what punishment it is that may be inflicted upon an ordinary soldier, because, for the life of me I cannot quite understand what this particular Clause 5 of Section 44 really means. No Member in this House would gather from this that field punishment meant really the crucifixion of which we have heard so much. I have never been in the Army myself, and for the satisfaction of those gentlemen opposite who are so anxious to know whether some of us on this side of the House have been in the Army, I might say that I never would go into the Army. I do not want there to be any misunderstanding. Although I am above military age, I should not go if I were of military age. [An HON. MEMBER: "Shame! "] Shame or no shame, I do not want anyone to kill for me, and I do not want to kill anyone.
The point I want to make is that I have taken the trouble to consult friends who have been in the Army, who have served a good deal of time in the army, both during the late war and previously and I cannot understand hon. Members opposite who stand up and say that the one thing that keeps the army together is not the discipline but the respect of the ordinary soldier for the command, from the subaltern upwards. If that is so, why do you want such a hideous punishment as that of tying a man to a wheel or pegging him down on the ground in the open sun and exposing him in that sort
of way to all the rigours of heat and in addition to all the rigours of not being able to move his body or his arms and generally to be treated just like a lump of wood? The reason you always give for that sort of punishment is because war is unnatural. It is something that men would not undertake if they had freedom of choice. You may think that an army is a free army, free enlistment. There is economic conscription driving men into the army because of hunger and privation.

Mr. HOHLER: On a point of Order. Has this any bearing on the Amendment?

The CHAIRMAN: The argument is a little discursive, but I think it has some bearing.

2.0 A.M.

Mr. LANSBURY: You have this brutal and hideous form of punishment in order to preserve discipline in the Army, which is created by economic conditions. That is my argument, and I should have thought that it was perfectly relevant and perfectly clear to any ordinary intellect. The difficulty in dealing with this subject is that one has to read through first of all a tiny Bill which is brought in this year and which continues for another year a big Act. I think the Committee ought to consider whether we ought not to have the whole Bill circulated in time for Members to make themselves acquainted with it. We have had the greatest difficulty until to-night in getting sufficient copies of the Act in order to make ourselves acquainted with it, yet we are expected to discuss the question intelligently. I cannot tell, and I challenge hon. Members who do not belong to the Army and have not had experience of these Regulations to tell exactly for what offences this particular punishment is inflicted. Here are some of the offences for which men may be sentenced to this kind of punishment. During the war, there were something like 287,049 men charged with various offences. No one knows what punishment was inflicted on most of them. We know that only 21,225 were acquitted, and that means that 266,784 were convicted. Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman who is representing the Army to-night tell us how many of these men suffered this hideous punishment? The crimes these men might have
been punished in this way for, were offences against inhabitants, 1,810; 1,483 were charged with mutiny, 420 for cowardice, 37,000 desertion, 83,000 absence, 12,000 striking or violence, 29,000 insubordination, 11,000 disobedience, quitting their posts 8,562, drunkenness 39,000, loss of property 26,000. I believe loss of property meant that a man lost his kit or his gun or some other property of the State. There were 8,809 cases of theft, and it is a big tribute to the Army that only that tiny fragment was charged with that offence, and the eases of indecency were only 259. Then you get miscellaneous military offences nearly 48,000. How many of these men suffered crucifixion and pegging to the ground? There were 3,890 cases of self-inflicted wounds. There were 7,338 cases sentenced to penal servitude, including 140 for life. It would be very interesting to know for what these men were sentenced to penal servitude for life. I should like to appeal to the Army authorities that these men might be set free now, all these years after the conclusion of peace.
I understand that during the war field punishment No. I was inflicted in 59,843 cases, and field punishment No. 2 in 19,207 cases. It seems to me no reasonable man would want to continue that punishment. If you tell me it must be done to maintain discipline, that destroys altogether what we have heard about good feeling between officers and men, because it is perfectly certain that a large number of these men who underwent this punishment did so for offences against officers. I know that from what I was told by!,.oldiers who served in the Army during the late War. One who became a sergeant-major told me that a very large number of the offences with which the men were charged were quite trivial and that field punishment was really held over the men in a way that produced a terror-stricken condition amongst them. We are asking that this inhuman, brutal punishment shall be altogether done away with, that it should he taken right out of the Statute and that you shall rely on the ordinary punishments of hard labour and detention. I would prefer the Amendment that one of my hon. Friends is to try to move, that it be detention pure and simple, without hard labour. Many men might feel when serving, say, in Iraq, and when called upon to go up
into the air and bomb natives or destroy unprotected villages that that was a very cowardly thing to do and they might refuse to do it, and the authorities might not want to shoot them or kill them. This amendment gives the power of inflicting another sort of punishment on the men. In an Amendment which I hope to move later on I am going to try and get the ordinary soldier the right to be tried in another way, but for the moment I want to argue on this particular question of field punishment. I want to remove the airman and the ordinary soldier from the risk which comes from his refusal either to shoot down unarmed people in Indian villages or bomb Arabs from the sky, because I am one of those who had to enjoy, like everyone who lived in London, being bombed from the sky, and I know the feeling of intense disgust which arose when the bombing commenced. We were in a position to retaliate, but the unhappy Arab is not in a position to retaliate. When the Germans did so we called them Runs, and every name we could think of, and you blackguarded the King's cousin the raiser as a ruthless, brutal tiger. What do von think the people of Mesopotamia and "India think about you to-day? Anyone who declines to do that dirty work must not be subjected to crucifixion. We move this Amendment because we want to give the soldier the chance of refusing to do such miserable work as that. We want to give him the chance of refusing to bomb and kill unarmed people, and we want to save him from this beastly field punishment.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: The hon. Member for Bow and Bromley has covered such a large field that I feel in doubt whether it would be in order for me to follow, and in any case I hope that if this Amendment is to be allowed to range over so many cognate subjects which are not directly involved we shall at least not have to discuss them over again when the other Amendments upon the paper are reached. The hon. Member read out a large part of Section 44, which has nothing to do with the Amendment which is before the House. The punishments to which he referred are in all cases maximum punishments. They sound very severe but in practice they are applied in a far more mild form than the legal phraseology that was read out suggests.
King's Regulations lay down normal punishments in paragraph 583. They are far less severe than these maximum penalties to which the hon. Member refers.

Mr. LANSBURY: We have not got the King's Regulations.

An HON. MEMBER: Will the hon. and gallant Member read out the part to which he refers?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: Certainly.

Mr. BUCHANAN: It seems to me most important that we should have copies of these things. I have spent a considerable time trying to get a copy, and cannot get one.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: Let me just explain. We had no notice that these matters were going to be brought up. [HON. MEMBERS: "They were on the paper."] The Amendment of the hon. Member does not deal with the first part of Section 44 at all. It deals with a few words under which field punishment is instituted. We had no indication whatever that the whole of these punishments were going to be raised on this Clause. The hon. Member quoted a great many figures. I have not had notice of these particular figures and, as he knows, it is impossible to carry all these statistics in one's head. There is not a single man in prison at the present time on a sentence which was inflicted for a military offence during the war. I do not think I need follow the hon. Member into his misrepresentation—.

Mr. LANSBURY: I have not misrepresented any of these figures. They are taken from the Army reports.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I said misrepresentation of field punishment. I want to point out that many years ago so-called crucifixion was finally abolished. Crucifixion was applied as a former field punishment, where a man's arms were not allowed, when tied, to rest in a natural position. That was finally and completely forbidden, and it was laid down that if a man was tied, he had to have play for both his feet and for his arms, and his hands had to rest in a natural position. But I do not want to enter into details of field punishment No. 1, Why I think it is quite irrelevant is that we are already abolishing it.
I will only enter into it to this extent, that I want to relieve the misapprehension that crucifixion has been the law up to the present time. The position is this, that we believe that field punishment No. 1 is no longer necessary in view of the splendid discipline of the Army and it is a punishment which, however useful it may have been formerly, may now be abolished. These Rules for field punishment are laid down in the words to which the hon. Member's Amendment is directed, and the Rules are at file present time being agreed with the other Departments concerned, the Air Ministry and the Air Force, and as soon as these negotiations are at an end they will, under the Rules of the Act to which they are subject, be laid forty days before they are finally settled. We have no choice in the matter. We are bound by statute.

Captain BENN: The hon. and gallant Gentleman says these Rules will be laid. We know that, but the House has no power. They are laid but never discussed. Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give an undertaking that the House will be given an opportunity when Rules are laid to say whether they approve or not.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: No special facilities will be necessary and the Rules can be discussed when the ordinary opportunities arise. The matter is in no way urgent, as Field Punishment No. 1 is not in force at the present time. It is an active service penalty. We are bound before the Roles reach their final form to lay them before Parliament.

Mr. McENTEE: Are the men at present serving in Germany considered to be on active service?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: It is true they arc, but there is no field punishment in force.

Mr. HARDIE: Is flogging part of the arrangement still, and, if it is not, what takes its place?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: For many years past there has been no flogging. We are as anxious to abolish Field Punishment No. 1 as anybody. I may say that it was put up to the military advisers on the Army Council, and they were unanimously in favour of abolishing Field Punishment No. 1 in view of the state of
discipline in the Army. This is an active Service penalty, and if we were to have nothing to take its place, no Field Punishment No. 2 under which a man can be kept with his unit, we should certainly strike a very serious blow at discipline when troops are in dangerous positions. It is only human nature, when troops are in unsafe positions and when men's nerves are stretched to breaking point, that a man should be tempted to take an opportunity of getting away from the firing line. If, by committing a small offence, men could ensure going back to the comparative safety of a military prison, it is perfectly certain that we would put a very great incentive upon them. For that reason we must have some form of punishment which can be carried out while a man remains with his unit. The Amendment which the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley proposes is that we should strike out the words "under restraint." That would mean that we should not be able to keep a man with his unit at all, because if a guard is put over a man, if he is told to sit under a wall, he is under restraint. If a man is to be kept with his unit at all, taking part in the common danger, it is absolutely essential that there should be power to put him under restraint. We certainly have no reluctance to meet the demand for humanising Army punishment, but we do feel that it would be disastrous to discipline if this Amendment were carried, which would mean that for the most trivial offence on active service a man would be able to secure complete release from the firing line, and insure that he should be kept in a position of safety to the end of the war, when the inevitable amnesty would release him.

Captain BENN: I do not think there is much difference between us and I think that the hon. Gentleman who has shown such admirable good temper will be able to appreciate the point I hope to make. In the old days there was flogging in the Army. I used to hear old Generals and Admirals say that they would not have been the men they were if it had not been for flogging; it was the one thing that had introduced virility into their character. In the course of time, but not due to the conscience of Army men, flogging was abolished, and I am afraid that we must attribute the abolition of field punishment No. 1 to the same process and not to self-inspired instincts of humanity at the War Office. When
flogging was abolished, the Army Act was altered and it was forbidden in the Statute. It was quite possible to abolish flogging by omitting it in the regulations. That was not the course taken. The course taken was to put into the Statute words abolishing flogging. What does the hon. and gallant Gentleman propose to do about field punishment No. 1? He says he is agreed that this form of punishment has to go. The hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) says put it on the Statute and then there will be a statutory prohibition of the infliction of this punishment. I think it is a very reasonable request and it is one which is supported by precedent. Now the hon. and gallant Gentleman says we are to put it in the Regulations and these are to be laid before this House. That is quite true, but the Regulations are not under the control of this House. The part of the Act which implies to them merely says:
 All rules made in pursuance of this Section shall be laid before Parliament as soon as practicable after they are made, if Parliament he then sitting; if Parliament be not sitting, as soon as practicable after the beginning of the next session of Parliament.
That does not confer any power on the House to say whether it approves or disapproves of the form of the Regulations. They are laid, but unless the Government should give some time for their discussion the laying before the House has absolutely no effect at all. That being so, is it unreasonable to ask that in the case of field punishment No. 1 as in the case of flogging words should be introduced into the Statute which shall make it impossible for the War Office to make regulations inflicting this punishment. That seems to be an unanswerable case, and as everybody is agreed that field punishment No. 1 should go, I hope the Government will accept this Amendment or some Amendment of the kind and put,t into the Statute.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: I desire to support the Amendment. I happen to be an official of a society, 19,000 of whose members joined the Army for the last war, and I found in the records of their health after their return that many of these men have had their health broken, not by actual service in the Army, but by many of the inflictions that
were imposed in connection with the Regulations that we are now discussing. The Committee ought to bear in mind two or three points in relation to these punishments. The hon. Gentleman tried to turn us away with nice words, but I felt that he made the most feeble speech that I have ever heard in defence of a case. The mentality of those people who are connected with the Army must be completely changed. A man brought up for insubordination and penalised in this way, I venture to say that once he is punished in this form he will never again make a good soldier. I feel positive of this, too, that this punishment is not intended to reform the man who is punished. It is intended only to prevent other men from running away from nasty jobs.
That, I think, is the intention of the Regulations. We are told that there is such esprit de corps in the Army that the men will fight if you do nothing more than call upon them to do so. If that is so, I am astonished that more than a quarter of a million of men during the last war were charged with insubordination, at one time or another. Attention ought to be called to another aspect of this problem. I have read these Regulations, and I am surprised that no one has pointed out that the punishments for men are of a very much more severe character, and of a different kind and type, to the punishments intended for the officers in the Army. The responsibility of an officer is a great one. I have noticed, however, that when an ordinary soldier has failed in his duty he is sent to prison, and it is stated, on good authority, that when same generals fail in their duty they are sent to Parliament. They have in some cases been given huge pensions to get rid of them out of the Army. The ways of mankind are various. The Under-Secretary of State for War has stated that these are maximum punishments. We have had figures given in this House that the total number of men sentenced tr. death, whose sentences were carried out, was 260 odd during the last war. Surely that is a maximum punishment, and I do not think the hon. and gallant Gentleman can hide himself behind that point. But I would raise it to a little higher level than that. The world is moving to a different order of things.

Mr. PRINGLE: Are hon. Members in order when they are reclining in the House?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): I am not quite sure to which hon. Member the hen. Member refers.

Mr. PRINGLE: Do I understand that it is in Order for an hon. Member to recline in the House?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: There is no rule regarding the matter.

Mr. THOMAS: Do you rule, Sir, that my hon. Friend is entitled to take the necessary steps in the matter?

Mr. DAVIES: I am very sorry, Captain FitzRoy, that there does not seem to be any rule of this House to help you to decide whether reclining in the House of Commons is in Order or not.

Lieut.-Colonel CROFT: As an hon. Member while listening to a colleague has gone to sleep, is it not right that something should be done?

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the fact that the proceedings are now almost taking a turn of comedy, and in view of the fact that certain Members are unable to carry on through exhaustion, would I be in Order in moving that the House should adjourn?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is interrupting another hon. Member in his speech.

Mr. DAVIES: I would like to ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman if he would tell the House the difference between the sentences meted out to officers under Clause 44 of the Army Act and the sentences meted out for the same insubordination to the ordinary soldier? It would be very interesting if we could get to know whether the hon. and gallant Gentleman knows what regulations govern the Red Army in Russia, for instance. It would be very interesting to know whether the British War Office at any time has ever studied how the Russian Army of about three quarters of a million men is carried on, I believe, without any punishment at all. I feel there cannot be any punishment for a man who joins the Red Army. There may be, but I am entitled to ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman whether he has studied the
army regulations of the Army of Russia. I know we have travelled a great deal away from the Amendment. But I do want to say that the hon. and gallant Gentleman in supporting and justifying his case to-night has, in my view, definitely given the whole case away. He has stated in fact that you cannot carry on a war unless you inflict punishments up to the point of death itself upon our own people. I believe I am right in stating that the punishment upon our own soldiers who are caught acting in an insubordinate way is more severe than is meted out to men who are captured from the enemy camps. If that can be proved, and I think it can he proved, it makes the whole case of war ridiculous. I agree with regard to war, that war after all is
 The statesman's game, the priest's delight,
The lawyer's jest, and the hired assassin's trade.
I trust that this House will declare that this brutal punishment shall once and for all be done away.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I am not going to follow the hon. Member in a survey of the disciplinary system of the Russian or any other army, because the question before the Committee is field punishment. The hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Wedgwood Benn) was dissatisfied with our proposal to leave this matter to he dealt with in the ordinary way by regulation. Well, we have nothing to keep back. We are quite prepared to put our words into the Act and if it will satisfy the Committee—though I cannot take the words of the Amendment—I am prepared to move to insert after the word "flogging" the words—" or attachment to a fixed object "—if the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley will withdraw his Amendment.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member will have either to move a new Clause or else move his Amendment as an Amendment to the Clause now under discussion.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I will move, if the hon Member for Bow and and Bromley will withdraw his Clause my Amendment in this form that after the word "flogging" in Sub-section (5) of Section 44 of the Army Act there shall be inserted the words "or attachment to a fixed object."

Major WARING: I do not think that the suggestion made by the hon. and gallant Gentleman gets us any further. In point of fact this Amendment refers to both field punishments. The only difference between field punishment No. 1 and field punishment No. 2 is this question of attachment to a fixed object. Field punishment No. 2 permits of a man being loaded with chains and fetters, and ropes or straps may be substituted if fetters are not available. It is identically the same punishment and it was devised at the same time as field punishment No. 1. The hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) referred to the Debates that took place in this House when flogging was abolished. There was some difficulty in devising a form of punishment that should take its place, and after some six months' delay Regulations were laid upon the Table devising this No. 2 punishment. When they were examined by the House, all those Members who had been in favour of corporal punishment were unanimous in denouncing this new form of punishment as being far more barbarous than flogging. The Amendment abolishee both, and I maintain that the hon. Member ought to carry his Amendment to a division in order that we should once and for all get rid of these forms of putting people into irons and handcuffs. The suggestion put forward by the hon. and gallant Member makes no difference whatever.

Mr. THOMAS: I do not think any useful purpose win be served by the Amendment indicated because it is clearly obvious that the speech first made demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that the concession in no way meets the Amendment moved by the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury). I would like to draw the attention of the Committee to this significant change. We are discussing field punishment at the moment. My hon. Friend and the whole House was agreed that it is wrong and ought to be abolished. But only 12 months ago we were debating this same subject and I remember the hon. and gallant Member's predecessor from the Treasury Box, in defence of field punishment No. 1, read a letter from the Commander in Chief and the whole case turned on that letter. We are now told that perhaps all parts of the House agree to what
we said 12 months ago and which was defended on entirely different grounds. The fact is that we must go to a Division on this matter. It has been demonstrated that the concession offered from the Government side is not a concession and for that reason I suggest that no purpose would be served in moving the Amendment, because there can be no agreement upon it.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for shortening the proceedings by the speech he has made. May I say, however, that he is not quite accurate in saying we have abolished field punishment as a result of his hon. Friend putting down an Amendment.

Mr. THOMAS: I was merely dealing with the point you made. You dealt with the question as being something that the Whole House had agreed with and that the Army Council had accepted, and I was merely indicating that the last time we were debating this question not only was the House agreed, but it is the same Army Council that has now agreed it was wrong.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I only made the offer of the Amendment to meet the point of the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Capt. Benn), but if it is not satisfactory to the other sections of the Opposition it would be absurd of me to press it. The reason we cannot accept the proposal to take away all power to put a man in fetters is that, if we did so, we would not have the power which the police have to place a violent man under restraint or in handcuffs. Such restraint, however, never is and never can be used as a punishment. I made this offer in an effort to meet hon. Members opposite, but, as I have failed, the question will go to the Division, and we will deal with the matter by Regulation.

Mr. THOMAS: I have just refreshed my memory, and it is important the Committee should know exactly what was said on this question 12 months ago. Let us compare the difference in the Debate and the Army Council's view 12 months ago. A Committee fully considered the matter and decided that Field Punishment No. 1 ought to be kept. The opinions of such military leaders as Sir Douglas Haig and Sir William Robertson were taken
and they were in favour of the retention of the sentence. The Committee said:
 The Committee consider that the question of the retention or abolition of Field Punishment No. 1 is one depending mainly on whether any other punishment can be devised to take its place which is 6uitable and effective on active service. The views of officers commanding in various theatres of war were obtained by the Army Council. These strongly support the necessity of retaining Field Punishment No. 1, and this view i6 endorsed by the service members of the Committee. No suitable alternative punishment which has the support of Military and Air Force opinion has been suggested to the Committee. In these circumstances, they do not feel that they are in a position to recommend the abolition of Field Punishment No. 1.
That is from the OFFICIAL REPORT of 11th April, 1921. I want to submit that if any evidence were needed to persuade Members in all parts of the Committee as to the reasonableness of this Amendment it is the words I have just quoted. These words were the considered judgment of the same Army chiefs who report to-night that they have not only found an alternative but that they do not consider field punishment necessary. The real explanation for that change of opinion is clue to the knowledge of the change that has taken place in public opinion, and therefore for these reasons I hope my hon. Friend will reconsider the situation and let the suggestion he has made apply to Field Punishment No. 2.

Mr. TURNER: I want to support the Amendment. Field Punishments No. 1 and No. 2 are cruel and have not a reformatory effect. All punishments should have as their object making people better and not making them worse. Violence of this kind does not have the effect of producing proper discipline. It seems to me that in Section 44 there is a tremendous number of punishments devised for the ordinary soldier in the Army. When you start with the word "death," to me that is a very frightening punishment. Then you follow with penal servitude for a term of not less than three years, imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding two years, detention for a term not exceeding two years. All these things appeal to me as things that should be considerably reduced. Under Section 45, an officer may order into military custody an officer of inferior rank or any soldier engaged in a quarrel, fray or die-
order, and the punishments in Section 44 apply to Section 45. I think there have been disorders this week which, if they had taken place in the Army, would have led to some kind of punishment. I would not like to see field punishment No. 1 or No. 2 applied to my friend's on the other side who have created disturbances both in this and some of them in previous Parliaments. I urge that the best discipline in the Army is s cured by kindness and not by coercion, by example and not by this cruel punishment. Crucifixion has been condemned by most soldiers in His Majesty's Forces. They have looked upon it as a degrading, dehumanising, debasing thing. It has not been a corrective in any form. Anyone who studies our methods of punishment in the Army or outside of it is hound to lament the fact that our cruelties under our prison and military systems have not been beneficial to the discipline and well-being of the Army. In the last war many people were taken into the Army and many people joined out of patriotic and good motives. They tried to do their best, but in this world we are all liable to imperfections and failures. The Almighty does not endow us with all the perfections that mankind think we should realise. I do not want that in any shape or form we should blaspheme our Creator by such a system as Field Punishment No. 1 and No. 2. I am one of those old-fashioned folk who have, a great dislike for force or militarism of any sort, and I have a keen recollection of the verses of Russell Lowell, written during the civil war in 1865, when all those things, field punishment and flogging and so on, were in force in the American Army as in ours. The verses are:
 Ez fer war, I call it murder,—
Ther you hey it plain and flat;
I don't want to go no furder
Than my Testyment fer thet
If yer take a sword and draw it
And go stick a feller through,
Government ain't to answer for it,
Cod'll send the bill to you.

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Sir Robert Sanders): rose in his place, and claimed to more, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

Mr. PRINGLE: (seated and covered)
I wish to know whether it is in accordance with the traditions of this House to accept the Closure when an hon. Member below the Gangway has risen throughout the Debate and has not had an oppor-

tunity of contributing towards it. It is a disgraceful proceeding. I think the Government ought to show a sense of decency.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 187; Noes, 114.

Division No. 85.]
AYES.
[3.1 a.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Forestier-Walker, L.
Pease, William Edwin


Alexander, Co'. M. (Southwark)
Foxcroft. Captain Charles Talbot
Pennefalher, De Fonblanque


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Furness, G. J.
Ponny, Frederick George


Arcner-Shee. Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Garland, C. S.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Willrid W.
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Golf, Sir R. Park
Phllipson, Hilton


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Pielou, D. P.


Banks, Mitchell
Greene. Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hackn'y. N.)
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Earnston, Major Harry
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Privett, F. J.


Becker, Harry
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Raine, W.


Berry, Sir George
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Halstead, Major D.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Blundell, F. N.
Harrison, F. C.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Remer, J. R.


BoydCarpenler, Major A.
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Rentoul, G. S.


Brass, Captain W.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hennessy, Major J. R G.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brings, Harold
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Hogg, Rt. Hon.Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Ruqgles-Brise. Major E,


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clitton (Newbury)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Holbrook. Sir Arthur Richard
Russell, William (Polton)


Bmton. Sir James
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Hopkins, John W. W.
Samuel. A M. (Surrey, Farnhaml)


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Koufton, John plowrioht
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Howard. Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Button, H. S.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sandon, Lord


Campion, Lieut.-colonel W. R.
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Cassels, J. D.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Skeiton, A. N.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Chamberlain. Rt. Hn. J. A. (Birm.,W.)
Jonps. G. W. H. (Stoke NewInqton)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Clarry, Reginald George
Ketley, Major Fred (Ftotherham)
Spender-Clay. Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Clayton, G. C.
King. Captain Henry Douotas
Stanley, Lord


Cobb. Sir Cyril
Kinloch-Cooke. Sir Clement
Steel, Major S. Strang


Colfox, Major Win. Phillips
Lane Fox, Lieut. Colonel G. R.
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Boale
Lloyd, Cvril E. (Dudley)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Cope, Major William
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Courthooe, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Lorimer. H. D.
Sutcliffe, T.


Craiq, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Lort-Wllllams, J.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford. Henley)


Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Thomson. F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Lumley, L. R.
Titchlield, Marquess of


Curzon, Captain Viscount
McNeill. Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
T'yon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davidson. J. C C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Manvilte. Edward
Tubbs, S. W.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Mafesson, H. D. R.
Turton, Edmund Russborouqh


Dawson, Sir Philip
Mercer, Colonel H.
Wa'ts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Milne. J. S. Wardiaw
Wells, S. R.


Du Pre. Colonel William Baring
Moore. Major-General sir Newton J
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Edge, Captain Sir William
Moore-Brabazon. Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
White. Col G. D. (Southport)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mnreinn. Captain Alnernon H.
Willey. Arthur


Ednam, Viscount
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Hontton)
Winterton. Earl


Elliot. Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Murchison, C. K.
Wise. Frederick


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Nail, Major Joseph
Wolmer, Viscount


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Nevman. Colonel J. R. P. (Flnchley)
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Ersklne-Bolst. Captain C.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Woodcock, Colonel H, C.


Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)
Nieid, Sir Herbert
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Lolton M.
Norton-Griffiths. Lieut-Col. Sir John



Falcon. Captain Michael
O'Neill. Rt. Hon. Hugh
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Falle. Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Paget, T. G.
Gibbs.


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Parker, Owen (Kettering)



NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield. Hlllsbro')
Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Brotherton, J.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Bonwick, A.
Buchanan, G.


Barnes, A.
Bowdler. W. A.
Buckie. J.


Batey, Joseph
Broad. F. A.
Burgess, S.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Bromfield, William
Buxton, Charles (Accrington)


Cairns, John
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Saklatvala, S.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Sal'er, Dr. A.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sexton, James


Darbishire. C. W,
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Shinweil, Emanuel


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kirkwood, D.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dudgeon, Major C. R,
Lausbury, George
Simpson, J. Hope


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lawson. John James
Sited, Charles H.


Dunnico, H.
Leach, W.
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Ede, James Chutor
Lee, F.
Snell. Harry


Entwlstle, Major C. F.
Linfield, F. C.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Foot, Isaac
Lowth, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Gosling, Harry
Lunn, William
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Grey, Frank (Oxford)
M'Entee, V. L,
Sullivan, J.


Greenall, T.
McLaren, Andrew
Thomas, Rt. Hon, James H. (Derby)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Thorne. W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Grenlell, D. Ft. (Glamorgan)
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Klnc'd'ne, E.)
Turner, Ben


Groves, T,
Maxton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Grundy, T. W.
Middieton, G.
Waring, Major Walter


Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Warne, G. H.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Weir, L. M.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Newbold, J. T. W.
Welsh, J. C.


Hardie, George D.
Oliver, George Harold
Westwood, J.


Hayday, Arthur
Paling, W.
Wheatiey. J.


Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Patllnson, S. (Horncastle)
Whiteley, w.


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Phillipps, Vivian
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Herrlotts, J.
Potts, John S.
Wilson. C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hirst, G. H.
Pringle. W. M. R.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Jenkins W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Riley, Ben
Wright, W.


Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Sromwlch)



Jonas, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Amnion and Mr. T. Griffiths.

Question put accordingly, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 118; Noes, 182.

Division No. 86.]
AYES.
[3.10 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hlllsbro')
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Ritson, J.


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Barnes, A.
Herriotts, J.
Saklatvala. S.


Bntey, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. A.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sexton, James


Berkeley, captain Reginald
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Bonwick, A.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Shinweil, Emanuel


Bowdler, W. A.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Broad, F. A.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Sllvertown)
Simpson. J. Hope


Bromfield. William
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Sitch, Charles H.


Brotherton. J.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Buchanan, G.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Snell, Harry


Buckle, J.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Burgess, S.
Kirkwood, D.
Stephen, Campbell


Buxton, Charles (Accrlngton)
Lansbury, George
Stevart, Gershom (Wirral)


Cairns, John
Lawson, John James
Sullivan, J.


Cape, Thomas
Leach, W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Charleton, H. C.
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Darbishire. C. W.
Linfield. F. C.
Turner, Ben


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lowth, T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Waring, Major Walter


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
M'Entee, V. L.
Warne. G. H.


Dufly, T. Gavan
McLaren, Andrew
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Dunnlce. H.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Weir. L. M.


Ede, James Chuter
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, E.)
Welsh, J. C.


Edge, Captain Sir William
Maxton, James
Westwood, J.


Entwistie. Major C. F.
Middieton, G.
Wheatiey, J.


Foot, Isaac
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Whi'e, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


Gosling, Harry
Murray. R. (Renfrew, Western)
Whiteley, W.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Newbold, J. T. W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grecnail, T.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercllffe)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Grenlell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Groves, T.
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Wright, W.


Grundy, T. W.
Phillipps, Vivian
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Potts, John S.



Hall. F. (York, w, R., Normanton)
Pringle. W. M. R.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES —


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Mr. Morgan Jones and Mr. T.


Hardie, George D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Griffiths.


Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Pease, William Edwin


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Furness, G. J.
Pennelather, De Fonblanque


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Garland, C. S.
Penny, Frederick George


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Goft. Sir R. Park
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Astor, J. J. (Kent Dover)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Fhilipson, Hilton


Battour, George (Hampstead)
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hackn'y. N.)
Pielou, D. P.


Banks, Mitchell
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Pownall. Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Barnston, Major Harry
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Privett, F. J.


Becker, Harry
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Raine, W.


Berry, Sir George
Halstead, Major D.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Blrchall, Major J. Dearman
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Blades. Sir George Rowland
Harrison, F. C.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Blundell. F. N.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Remer, J. R.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hay. Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Rentoul, G. S.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Brass, Captain W.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford. Hereford)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Robertson. J. D. (Islington, W.)


Brions, Harold
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Ruggles-Brise. Major E.


Brown. Major D. C. (Hexham)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Russell, William (Bolton)


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Bruton, Sir James
Hopkins, John W. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Houlton, John Plowright
Samuel, Samuel (Wdsworth, Putney)


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Howard, Lapt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Howard-Eury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Button, H. S.
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sandon, Lord


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Shepperson. E. W.


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Inskip. Sir Thomas Walker H.
Skelton, A. N.


Cassels, J. D.
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Caycer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Jones. G. W. H. (Stoke Newlngton
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N (Ladywood)
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Spender-Clay, Lieut-Colonel H. H.


Clarry, Reginald George
King, Capt. Henry Douglas
Stanley, Lord


Clayton, G. C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Steel, Major S. Strang


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Colvln, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Cope. Major William
Lorimer, H. D.
Sutcliffe, T.


Courfhope. Lieut-Col. George L.
Lort-Willlams, J.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxlord. Henley)


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Thomson. F C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Crott, Lieut.-Colonel Henrs Paoe
Lumley, L. R.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
McNeill. Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Curzon. Captain viscount
Manville, Edward
Tubbs, S. W.


Davidson, J. C. C.(Hemel Hempstead)
Margesson, H, D. R.
Turton, Edmund Russborouqh


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Mercer, Colonel H.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Wilhington)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Milne, J. S. Wardiaw
Wells. S. R.


Doyle. N. Grattan
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Wheler. Col. Granville C. H.


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
White. Col G. n. (Southport)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Morelng, Captain Algernon H.
Willey, Arthur


Ednam, Viscount
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Winterton, Earl


Elliot, Caut. Waller E. (Lanark)
Murchison. C. K.
Wise, Frederick


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Nail, Major Joseph
Wolmer, Viscount


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Flnchley)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Erskine-Bolst. Captain C.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen.J (Westminster)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Norton-Griffiths. Lieut.-Col. Sir John
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Falcon, Captain Michael
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh



Faile, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Paget, T G.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Forestier-Walker, L.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Gibbs.

Mr. MACLEAN: On a point of Order. In a case where one Division follows another, is it in order for Members of the House who have already recorded their votes in one Lobby to enter the other Lobby in anticipation of another Division, and to take their places in such a way as to prevent Members passing through between the clerks so that they can have their votes recorded?

The CHAIRMAN: If some hon. Members willingly or unwillingly cause actual obstruction to other Members at
the turnstile, undoubtedly it would not be in order, and I should very much deprecate it.

Mr. MACLEAN: May I ask whether any instruction can be issued from the Chair that when Members enter the Lobby in anticipation of a second Division, they should keep to the lower end of the Lobby until such time as the first Division is finished?

The CHAIRMAN: I think that to give an instruction from the Chair would rather imply that there would be some
means of seeing that the instruction was carried out, and the Chairman cannot be in the Lobby as well as in the House. I would suggest that hon. Members do not go into the Lobby in which they are intending to vote in the Division until the Question for the next Division has been put.

Mr. THOMAS: I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
I do so with the single-minded desire to meet what I feel are the wishes and convenience of Members in all parts of the Committee. I am very doubtful whether, in the whole history of Parliament, there has been a Government faced with such a situation as they are at the present moment. Here they have passed thought a strenuous week's work. Those of us who sit on this side of the House can quite imagine how worried, how tired and how totally unfitted—[Interruption.]

Colonel Sir ARTHUR HOLBROOK: I object to any member of the Committee saying that the Government is unfit.

Mr. THOMAS: I hesitatingly withdraw the statement that the hon. Member is unfit, but I felt that he had perhaps some sympathy with his leaders. Let us visualise the situation at this moment. The Government have gone through the experiences of the last few days. Here is the Opposition ready to relieve them of their difficulties; able and willing to give them a chance on Friday morning, at 3.30 after such a week. At this time I ask Members seriously to remember

what has to be discussed. We have just discussed Field Punishment No. 1.

HON. MEMBERS: And No. 2.

Mr. THOMAS: No, we did not discuss No. 2. Looking at the Order Paper, one sees that there are ten further Amendments to be discussed. The Committee is incapable—[interruption.] Of course, I withdraw so far as it applied to this side of the Committee. For these reasons, and many more, I move—

Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The Committee proceeded to a Division

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: (seated and covered)
May I ask whether the Motion put by you, Mr. Hope, is a debatable Motion and whether an hon. Member is in order in rising to address you on your putting the question?

The CHAIRMAN: The Motion is debatable if the Chair allow it to he debated.

Mr. PRINGLE: (seated and covered)
May I ask whether, on a Motion to report Progress, when the Chair allows a speech in favour of the Motion that does not by itself indicate that the Motion is debatable and admit a reply is allowable to such a speech?

The CHAIRMAN: It is entirely in the discretion of the Chair, according to the circumstances of the Debate.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 114; Noes, 189.

Division No. 87.]
AYES.
[3.27 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Dunnico, H.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)


Ammon, Charles George
Ede, James Chater
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Entwistle, Major C. F.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Barnes, A.
Foot, Isaac
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Batey, Joseph
Gosling, Harry
Jones, R. T, (Carnarvon)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Greenall, T.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)


Bonwick, A.
Greenwood. A. (Nelson and Colne)
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.


Bowdler, W. A.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Kirkwood, D.


Broad. F. A.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lansbury, George


Brsmiietd. William
Groves, T.
Lawson, John James


Brutherton, J.
Grundy, T. W.
Leach, w.


Buchanan, G.
Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Lee, F.


Buckie, J.
Hall, F. (York. W.R., Normanton)
Linffeld, F. C.


Burgess, S.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Lowth, T.


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Hardie, George D.
Lunn, William


Cairns, John
Hayday, Arthur
M'Entee, V. L.


Cape, Thomas
Hayes. John Henry (Edge Hill)
McLaren, Andrew


Charleton, H. C,
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Marlin, F. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, E.)


Darbishire, C. W.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Maxton, James


Davies. Evan (Ebbw Vain)
Herriotts, J.
Middleton, G.


Davies, Rhvs John fWesthoughton)
Hirst, G. H.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Murray, R. (Renfrew. Western)


Dutfy, T. Gavan
John, William (Rhondda West)
Newbold, J. T. W.


Oliver, George Harold
Simpson, J. Hope
Welsh, J. C.


Paling, w.
Sitch, Charles H.
Westwood, J,


Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)
Wheatley, J.


Phillipps. Vivian
Snell, Harry
White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


Potts, John S.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)
Whiteley, W.


Pringle, W. M. R.
Stephen, Campbell
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Riley, Ben
Sullivan, J.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Ritson, J.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)
Thorne. W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Wright, W.


Saklatvala, S.
Turner, Ben
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Sexton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.



Shaw. Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)
Warne, G. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Shlnwell, Emanuel
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Mr. Neil Maclean and Mr.


Short, Allred (wednesbury)
Weir, L. M.
Robertson.


NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Pease, William Edwin


Alexander, Col, M. (South.vark)
Furness, G. J.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S,
Garland, C. S.
Penny, Frederick George


Archer-Shee. Lieut.-Colonel Martin
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Golf, Sir R. Park
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Philipson, Hilton


Balfour. George (Hampstead)
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Pielou, D. P.


Banks, Mitchell
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Guinness, Lleut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Pownall. Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Barnston, Major Harry
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Privett, F. J.


Becker, Harry
Hacking, Captain Douglao H.
Raine, w.


Berry, Sir George
Halstead, Major D.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Harrison, F. C.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Blundell, F, N.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bowyer. Capt. G. E. W.
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Remer, J. R.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Brass, Captain W.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Reynolds, W. G. w.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Cllve
Hlley, Sir Ernest
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford. Hereford)


Brigqs. Harold
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Britain, Sir Harry
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Roundeil. Colonel R. F.


Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Ruggies-Brise, Major E.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell, William (Bolton)


Bruton, Sir James
Hopkins, John W. W.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Houfton, John Plowright
Samuel. A M. (Surrey. Farnham)


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Howard, Capt D. (Cumberland, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Button, H. S,
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sanderson. Sir Frank B.


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Sandon, Lord


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shepperson, E. W.


Casseis, J. D.
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Skelton, A. N.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Somerville. A. A. (Windsor)


Clarry, Reginald George
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H H.


Clayton, G. C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Lord


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Steel. Major S. Strang


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Cope. Major William
Lorimer, H. D.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Lort-Wllllams, J.
Sutcliffe. T.


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Lumley, L. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Titchfield, Marquess of


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Manville, Edward
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davidson, J.C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Margesson, H. D. R.
Tubbs, S. W.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Meicer, Colonel H.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Dawson, Sir Philip
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Waring, Major Walter


Doyle, N. Gratlan
Moore. Major-General Sir Newton J.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wells, S. R.


Edge, Captain Sir William
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Wheler. Col. Granville C. H


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Ednam, Viscount
Murchison. C. K.
Willey, Arthur


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Nail, Major Joseph
Winterton, Earl


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Wise, Frederick


Ersklne, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Excter)
Wolmer, Viscount


Erskine-Botst, Captain C.
Nicholson, Brio.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)
Nield, Sir Herbert
Woodcock. Colonel H. C.


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Falcon, Captain Michael
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William



Felle, Major Sir Bertram Godlray
Paget, T. G.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Gibbs.


Forestier-Walker, L.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section 80.)

At the end of Sub-section (1) of Section eighty of the Army Act, the following Sub-section shall be added:

(2) The general conditions of the contract to be entered into shall include an option as to whether the recruit is willing to take duty in aid of the civil power in connection with a trade dispute, and unless this has been signed in the affirmative by the recruit his refusal to undertake such duty during his period of service shall not constitute an offence under this Act or of any rules or regulations connected with service in the Army.—[Mr. Lansbury.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. LANSBURY: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
In moving this Clause I would like to say first that it is not necessary that such a rule or such a proviso should apply to officers. Officers, it has been demonstrated in the British Army, are free either to serve or not to serve. During the Home Rule controversy at the Curragh Camp a number of officers under, I think, General Gough, refused to take orders in regard to putting down the incipient rebellion which was being organised by the friends of the present Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs and led in the main by Lord Carson and Mr. Galloper Smith, now Lord Birkenhead.

The CHAIRMAN: I do not think those events of 1914 were quite a trade dispute.

Mr. LANSBURY: The proviso such as this which we require for the private soldier is not required for the officer, because the officer can use his discretion. If the private soldier could use his discretion as did the officers of the Curragh we should not need to move this Amendment. I think that is perfectly clear to the Committee. In connection with the war itself there was a right hon. Gentleman who made a dramatic exit from this House to go to his place in France and in a few months' time he was back in his place on the Front Treasury Bench.

Mr. DENNIS HERBERT: On a point of Order. Is it in Order for the hon. Member, in moving an amendment with regard to private soldiers, to make a speech as to the want of any such necessity for a resolution with regard to a totally different class, namely, the officers?

The CHAIRMAN: I think not, because this is reference to enlistment and not to the giving of commissions. I do not think the hon. Member would be in order to pursue this.

Mr. THOMAS: On a point of Order, I want to submit to you that my hon. Friend is entitled to give reasons for his amendment that are relevant. Surely nothing is so near his contention than the fact that what he is now proposing for the private soldier is not necessary for the officer because the discretion is given, and surely he is entitled to submit that to the consideration of hon. Members who may not be aware of the fact.

The CHAIRMAN: I thought the hon. Member at first was in order, but I see this Clause could not possibly apply to officers, so there is no need to argue that it should not.

Mr. THOMAS: That is not my hon. Friend's contention. He has said nothing about officers—

HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

Mr. A. HENDERSON: Hear the sentence out.

Mr. THOMAS: He has said nothing about officers being called upon to make this declaration on enlistment. What he has contended is that officers are given this power to-day, and because they are given this power it ought not to be denied to the private soldier. Surely a Member is entitled in a matter of this kind to use officers as merely illustrating his point.

The CHAIRMAN: Officers are riot enlisted in the technical sense of this particular Section of the Army Act. Therefore no Amendment with regard to them can be brought under this particular Clause. Officers must use discretion, but the word "discretion" here must not be so used as to introduce a new and contentious line of argument.

Mr. THOMAS: Would it be relevant for me to point out that the present Prime Minister, from the box that I am standing at now, declared that an officer was entitled to use his discretion and act on the dictates of his conscience in a matter that affected his position as an officer, and if it is in order to quote such a statement from the Prime Minister to prove that what is now being asked for is
already conceded to one section of the Army, is it out of order to ask the House to consider that aspect of the case?

The CHAIRMAN: It would not, I think, be out of order to quote the sentence of the Prime Minister, but it would be out of order so to debate on it as to raise a question which was a subject of controversy in 1914.

Mr. THOMAS: This is not now a question of the merits. This is question of protecting the rights of Members. It is a new issue, and I am raising it purely on that ground. I again submit that my hon. Friend is entitled to draw the attention of the House to an analogous position applying to officers that he is now contending should be conceded to all soldiers. I do hope you will, at least, allow that point, because it is the only subject that for the moment we are raising on the point of Order.

The CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Member goes no further than the right hon. Gentleman has suggested, I could say nothing, but hon. Members are not entitled, under cover of a quotation, to bring in controversial matter that is not relevant to the argument.

Mr. PRINGLE: On a point or Order. I wish to ask whether, in the first place, yon rule an argument by analogy out of order and, in the second place, whether you rule out of order an argument that raises controversy?

The CHAIRMAN: I must repeat the illustration I gave the other night. Supposing one hon. Member were complaining that another hon. Member was trying to destroy a Bill. If the hon. Member said: "The hon. Member has a passion for killing even as he killed his grandmother in the past." The argument would then be diverted to the death of the grandmother. The hon. Member would be entitled to show that he did not so kill his relative, and the Debate would be diverted from its proper channel. It is against that that I protest.

Mr. SHINWELL: May I submit, on a point of Order, that the illustration you have used is hypothetical and is not relevant to the matter?

Mr. PRINGLE: If your ruling now is accurate it justifies, first, argument by
analogy; secondly, a hypothetical one and, third, a controversial one.

Mr. LANSBURY: I want, Mr. Hope, to recall to your mind that when you and others occupied the position I am occupying here this evening, there was in my judgment very considerable latitude given in discussing this Bill. We were ruled out from discussing it on Second Reading, and I was assured by yourself from the Chair that there would be ample opportunity of discussing it in Committee, and I have never yet known so restricted a discussion on this Bill as has been laid down to us to-night. I want to protest, on my own behalf, against the doctrine that I must not use an example. I am not arguing that officers are enlisted. I am arguing that they ought to come under just such a provision as shall be provided for the ordinary soldier. I am only arguing that the officers have a privilege which I want the common soldier to enjoy, that is, the freedom to decline certain service if it is obnoxious to him, It was distinctly and definitely stated in this House that certain officers would not take service against the Ulster men if called upon. I repeat that officers in the British Army, according to Lord Roberts, have a right to exercise their conscientious objections to certain service and to refuse to undertake it. [HON. MEMBERS: "No! "] Well, it is on record that the late Lord Roberts most definitely and distinctly stated that an officer had a conscientious right to refuse to do what his conscience told him he ought not to do, and I am claiming to-night that the ordinary trade unionist who, either from choice or economic force, is driven into the Army should have the same right. He may he called upon, as he was at Featherstone, to shoot miners, or at Hull to shoot dockers, or at Llanelly to shoot railwaymen, and I say every workman in the Army should have the right to say, "No, that is something I will never do, to shoot down my own class in my own country." Therefore, we want, when the man enlists, that he shall have put before him the alternative of either accepting universal service, according to the orders of his superior officer, or that he shall have the right to sign this affirmation. We ask that the man shall be, as hon. Members opposite are, loyal to his class. There are no more loyal people to their own set than hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite and we want to create the same
sort of spirit among the British workmen who have to join the Army, because whenever he is called upon to shoot and interfere in a dispute he is ranging himself or the side of the employers, the capitalists and the landlords. That is what he is doing all the time. [Laughter.] Hon. Members laugh. Could any hon. Member tell me of any strike or ally lock-out where the possessing classes have taken sides with the workmen? You know you never have. You are ranged in a clear division against the workmen and up to now you have been able to have the Army and the Navy at your disposal. We want to prevent that in future. We do not want that in addition to the weapon of hunger and the weapon of starvation you should also have the lethal weapon of the Army with you. We do not want our people to be called upon to shoot down unemployed men and men on strike. If there are disturbances —and we do not believe there would be disturbances except for the causes that lead to the disturbances, and these causes ought to be removed—we ask you to-night to give to our people the same right that was exercised by officers in the Army, either to join the regiment or leave the regiment. We want them to have this choice. We Want the ordinary common soldier to have the same choice as the officers of the Curragh had. I hope hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who want these privileges will vote with us and give them to the working classes as well.

Major HARVEY: Some of the words I have heard to-night with regard to the British Army have really annoyed me so much that f have decided to speak in defence of the Army which we all realise has been one of two things—if I include the Navy which has made it possible for us to sit here to-night. A privilege has always been given to Members who rise for the first time and I hope it will be accorded to me. With regard to the suggestion that a man who enlists in the Army should sign a certain declaration that he will not in certain particular circumstances carry out the duty which lie has enlisted to do, I think the ease is very similar to the system we have heard suggested that a man who joins a certain trade union should specifically sign a declaration that for certain specific purposes he will not have to pay his contribution. I was going to speak
about officers of the Curragh but I think, Mr. Hope, you have ruled that to be out of order. Officers certainly cannot be compared, as I think has been done, to conscientious objectors. I have the honour of serving His Majesty in the Army for some 17 years and I rather object to hearing the officers M the Army compared even by inference to conscientious objectors. One other particular thing struck me in the speech of the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury). He said that trade unionists are driven into the Army. Perhaps that may he, but if they join the Army, I submit that they are joining the hest trades union in the country.

The CHAIRMAN: I must interrupt the hon. and gallant Member. The proposal before the Committee is really a limited proposal and I think he must confine himself to it.

Major HARVEY: I was just comparing the Army to the trade unions. I should be very sorry to think that this Committee would agree to the Amendment which has been proposed, that these men should be permitted to sign a declaration of the sort which would not only permit them, but absolutely force them under certain circumstances to refuse to obey the dictates of their hearts and their conscience and really stultify their very existence as soldiers of His Majesty's Forces.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I would put it. to my hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) that this new Clause is a mistake. All that can happen if this were the law of the land would be that the man who fused to sign the form saying that he was willing to do anything he eras requested—I think that is the form would not be accepted. The result would be that you would get an Army not sympathetic to the trade unions and to the Labour movement and the last resort of the people, namely, the refusal of the troops to shoot when the worst, happened, would be gone. After all, I do not think there is any danger of revolution in this country. What happened in the French, Russian and German revolutions, three great revolutions in the last hundred years or so, was that the troops went over to the other side, the side of the people. If you are going to have an Army who are willing and eager to obey orders and
shoot down their own class, you have that last safeguard removed.

Mr. R. DAVIES: Is it in order for the hon. Member to talk as he does in connection with this Amendment?

The CHAIRMAN: It is rather another matter.

4.0 A. M.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Let us not put our heads into the sand and pretend these things are impossible. We may get a Government even more stupid than the present one. [HON. MEMBERS: "Impossible.") Supposing the Die-hards went into the Government, they might use the armed force so as at to exasperate the people and such a situation would arise. I think that reason I have given is a very powerful one against this Clause and I will give another. Supposing we have a Labour Government in power and there was trouble say in Northern Ireland which threatened the security of these islands, and it was necessary to send troops to restore order there—

Mr. McENTEE: You will never restore order there.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: A great part of the officers of the Regular Army might plead for the same exemption as the soldiers. That happened of course in the case of the Curragh. I do not think it will happen again. They learned a pretty severe lesson at that time. I think the much-abused Liberal Government of that day handled the situation very well. I was an officer serving in the Navy at the time, and heard it frequently discussed.

The CHAIRMAN: I must apply the same rule against the hon. Member as against others.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: When a Labour Government come in they may need a reliable Army. It is perfectly legal to call out the Army in defence of the Civil power. You cannot get away from that. But it is necessary that Parliament should watch that there is no abuse of the Army power. Nevertheless it is necessary to have an army to keep order, and hon. Gentlemen on the Labour benches may be very glad in ten years time to have an army to put down a Fascisti movement organised by hon. Gentlemen opposite. These are two very
weighty reasons why hon. Members should not press this Amendment. I have never been abused for want of sympathy with the Trade Union or democratic movement in this country, but if hon. Members go to a division I really will be forced to vote against them.

Mr. McENTEE: rose—

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I have got first place, Mr. Chairman. My name is on the paper. Look at the paper, and you will see my name.

Mr. McENTEE: I have listened to some very extraordinary arguments, but I do not think any of them has been more extraordinary than the one to which we have just listened. I suppose I shall be accused, like other hon. Members on this side of not knowing anything about the Army or having no right to speak on Army Regulations because we 'have not been in the Army. It is true that I was in the Army only for about fourteen hours. My mother then came and fetched me home. It is one of the things I always thank my mother for. The only excuse I have to offer was that I vas very young. But the argument I have heard to-night appears to be that because one has never been in the Army, therefore he has no right to discuss the problems relating to the Army. That reminds me of an argument once put to me when I was discussing a question in the local Press, that because I had never been dead I had no right to discuss the burying laws. As a trade unionist, who has been in a trade union for about thirty years, I believe from my own personal contact with men who have served in the Army, and who are now serving in trade unions, that these men, like myself, are convinced that the soldiers to-day who have been trade unionists are compelled to do something that they do not desire to do, and things that no man ought to be asked to do. I remember the Curragh incident very well, and I remember then arguing that in my opinion the decision of the officer who refused to take part in any action against their colleagues was right. It might not have been strictly within the Army Regulations. I do not know whether it was or not, but I believe that it is a thing we ought not to insist upon that men who felt as they felt on a matter of conscience, a very important religious feeling—I felt that they were right in refusing to take any action against men in
Belfast or anywhere else. I felt for these officers and I want to say I feel the same with regard to the men in the circumstances mentioned by the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury). These men who were trade unionists in principle, and desired to carry out these principles, were compelled to fire on their fellow trade unionists. I reason that as it was in the case of these officers it should have been in the case of these men and the officers did what I think they had a right to do. If this privilege is conceded to one section of the Army, it ought to be conceded to any section of the, Army. If an officer has the right, as he appears to have, to refuse to serve against his fellow countrymen with whom he is in deep sympathy and with whom he has probably worked in the same movement, then men who are in the trade union movement, and men who are Socialists as I am and who believe in those principles of Socialism for which we are prepared to make very great sacrifices—for which many on these benches have made great sacrifices—should have the same right as the officers. This House has no right to say to these men that they shall be called upon to shoot down their fellow countrymen—men with whom they have worked and in whose principles they believe. [AN HON. MEMBER: "No, no! "] An hon. Member whose principles they believe. [An HON. MEMBER: "No, no "] An hon. Member says they do not, but does he know? I tell him that I know at the present time scores of men who are in the Army and who are Socialists.

An HON. MEMBER: You made a general assertion that the men in the Army were Socialists.

Mr. McENTEE: I made no such assertion. You are not quite awake. I say distinctly that there are scores and thousands of men in the Army who are proud to call themselves socialists, and I say you have no right to call upon these men to shoot down their fellow countrymen—[An HON. MEMBER: "They will not do it, either!"]—in a dispute between your class and my class. [An HON. MEMBER: "What is the difference? "] Your class has got everything and my class has nothing. You have got it because you have the power to rob.

The CHAIRMAN: May I ask hon. Gentlemen not to interrupt, and the hon. Member speaking to come to Section 80?

Mr. McENTEE: I do not think I wandered from it. We are asking in this Clause that the men shall have a choice whether they shall enlist for any purpose of all purposes, or that they should have a choice of the limits of those things they agree to do on joining the Army. A man should be able to go to a recruiting office and say I am prepared to sell my labour as a soldier—I am prepared to defend my country against any foreign enemy but I am not prepared to defend your class interests against the class interests of my own class. We are asking you that that man should have an opportunity to limit his service to fighting the enemies of his country. Surely there is nothing unreasonable in that? If you allow that you will get a bigger and better Army and Navy because some of those who have been brought up in the beliefs I hold—and I had a share in teaching some of them—which tell us that under no circumstances should they be prepared to sell themselves to the Army, or any force, to shoot down their fellow countrymen. I shall continue, to teach that on every opportunity I get. [An HON. MEMBER: "You should feel ashamed of yourself."] I never criticised the action of the officers in the Curragh because I believed they were right, and I believe you should give to the men of the working classes the right to say whether they should enter into the full enlistment or should limit their Army service to that against an enemy from some other country. You have power to determine by your votes whether you will give us what we are asking for, but if you fail to give it now we shall take it by and by.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I want to support this Amendment, and to draw your attention to the faces on the other side. We are seriously discussing a very serious matter to the people I represent, and it is being discussed when the average man here is not in a fit condition. [Interruption.] Come over here and look at yourselves, you are a sight for the gods. This is a very serious matter to the great majority of the people who join the British Army. They are not the officer class, they are the "have nots," and that is the reason why so
very little interest is taken in the matter. If it were the officer class whose fate was at stake as much as the fate of the working class is at stake here it would be quite a different matter. What is at stake here? It is that our soldiers shall have the option whether they will blackleg the working class or not. As I understand the working class they have no desire to blackmail their own class. There is no discussion in which we will be able to get you men in the wrong so readily as this discussion and you have brought it upon yourselves. Here you are proving beyond all shadow of doubt that there are two classes in the British Army. We who believe that there is a class struggle in society find it exemplified here. The working man who has nothing but his labour power incorporated in his body, which he has to sell is to be denied the right to have a conscience. Your conception of an Army means that a soldier shall have no conscience, that he ceases to be a man. That is your idea of a soldier. Our idea of a soldier is a man who would be free to act, not a man to be dragooned, to be treated as if he had no soul. But I am not astonished at this, because the class opposite have no souls themselves. I would like the Government to be very careful what they do in matters of this kind. I would warn them to be very careful because you must under-stand—

Sir A. HOLBROOK: Hear, hear!

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Oh, it is very easy to say "hear, hear!" I would like to draw the attention of the Committee to this point, that not only the men in the Army but the potential soldiers outside the Army are watching very care fully the actions of the men on the benches opposite. It was no idle statement that I made in my maiden speech when I told you that the writing was on the wall. There are no two ways about it, because there is a body of men in opposition to the powers-that-be who have the confidence of the people of the country. There is no denying that fact. There never was a time in history when the powers-that-be in this country as far as the Army is concerned—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): I must ask the hon. Member to confine himself to the Clause under discussion

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I am most anxious that those who are in authority to-day will exactly understand the feeling that is abroad in the country. Possibly there was a day when you could go on legislating in a given direction for the Army and for the working people, but that day has gone. It is over the border and away. The men who make up the Army were never so enlightened as they are to-day. The working class, from which it is largely drawn, and which we on these benches truly represent, were never so enlightened, or had as many men who are capable of stating their case as they have to-clay. Never in the history of the world, never at any time had the slave class so many capable men to defend them against you tyrants. Why we are so anxious that this Amendment should be accepted is because in 1911 the soldiers of this country were being organised to take the place of the railway men. Churchill was responsible for that. I suppose I dare not mention his name. I am desirous of burning in on the mind of those who are in power that we do not forget and we will not let our people forget, what has been done through actions like these by having the soldier tied. We are desirous of having the soldier free, so that any future Winston Churchills will not have the power to organise the British Army to take the place of the British working class, and of the railwaymen as in 1911. The right hon. Member for Paisley (Mr. Asquith) when he was Home Secretary used troops against the miners of the Featherstone, and the miners were murdered by Liberals. [Interruption.] It is all the same, whether it is Liberal or Tory or Coalition.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I must ask the hon. Member really to come to the point.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I am just on the point now. I must ask hon. and right hon. Members to accept this Amendment which has been put forward by the Labour party. Surely if you wish tc, be honest, if you do not wish to take a mean advantage of working men who have been driven by hunger and economic force—as the great majority of working lads are driven—into the British Army, I want you to have regard to the warning I have issued to you in good faith, because I believe everything I have told you about what is going on among the
working classes as far as your fate is concerned. Having said so much, I want to appeal to you on this occasion to support the Labour party on this and every other occasion, as I believe the Labour party is the hope of Britain. Your day has gone.

Lieut. - Colonel GUINNESS: The speeches which have been made on this Amendment show that its supporters attach the very widest meaning to those duties to aid the civil power in connection with trade disputes from which, under their proposal, future recruits to the Army would be entitled to claim exemption. Those non-military duties which sometimes fall to the lot of the Army are, from the soldiers' point of view, the most detestable work they are called upon to undertake, but it is work which, in the interests of the community, must be carried out in emergency by the Army. For that reason it is impossible for the Government to accept this Amendment. The duties which may fall under this definition are of two classes. First, there is the very exceptional case of troops being used, not in a riot, but in a national emergency. That is a case which occurs very rarely and it is carefully hedged round with safeguards. Troops can only be used in that way in connection with a trade dispute when, in the words of the preamble of the Bill, we are considering, there is danger to the United Kingdom. Otherwise it would not he lawful for orders to be given or the troops to act. In an ordinary trade dispute there is not power under our law for troops to be used in interference with industrial matters.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is it riot a fact that any magistrate can call up local troops in case of an emergency after the Riot Act has been read?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I said there were two functions to be performed. The first function is in a great emergency where troops can be called out in other than conditions of rioting. In the ordinary trade dispute there is no power to use troops.

Mr. SHINWELL: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. and gallant Gentleman, but may I put the point to him that, in connection with the Forty Hours' dispute in Clydeside, troops were held in readiness.
accompanied by all the paraphernalia of war, before the Riot Act was read or the magistrates or the Sheriff of the, County had given any intimation whatever to the Army authorities with regard to the dispute. The fact that the troops were held in readiness, without municipal sanction or judicial sanction, was largely responsible for the attitude of the public during the whole of the proceedings.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: It was during the dispute. [Interruption.]

Mr. SHINWELL: I submit very respectfully that with your consent, Mr. Chairman, and with the consent of the hon. Gentleman a very important point of Order was raised by me to which the hon. Gentleman was very generously and courteously going to reply. I wish to ask if it is desirable, in the interests of decorum that hon. Members opposite should interrupt. I warn them I will not stand it. I will not try to get up a row.

Mr. SALTER: If you want a row, you can have it.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: There have been interruptions from every side.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: My point is that, in the ordinary way, it is not in the scope of military service and authority for troops to be used in disputes. Time after time they have been asked for, and time after time the military authorities have held that it is not within the scope of military power or authority that they should be employed.

Mr. SULLIVAN: Is it not a fact that the troops were used in the miners' strike in 1920?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: That is not a point of Order.

Mr. SULLIVAN: It is a fact though.

The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN: Hon. Members have no right to interrupt other Members' speeches. They should not do it on the excuse of a point of Order.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: There was a case in Ireland, in Ballinasloe, which caused a good deal of comment, where in the case of the lunatic asylum, it was proposed that troops should be called out. It was decided that it would not be a proper occasion for troops to be called out. More often they are called out in
connection with riots, but in these cases the troops merely have the obligation of ordinary citizens under the common law to use such force and no more force as is necessary to maintain the peace. A common law obligation does not only arise, as the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Shinwell) suggests, after the Riot Act is read. The Riot Act is not an essential ingredient in the common law obligation of the citizen and the soldier as a citizen to maintain peace. All the difference that is made by the reading of the Riot Act is that anyone who disobeys it incurs penalties for felonies or misdemeanour. The obligation to maintain peace in no way depends upon it. The best the troops can do is to use their military formation and their discipline. They are not in any different position from any other citizens. The Amendment would really put the soldier above the law in this respect. It would exempt him from the obligation which is imposed upon any citizen, and it would further divide the Army into two classes with different obligations. [HON. MEMBERS: "They are divided already."] One can picture the hopeless position. The troops called out under conditions of riot and the officer trying to make out on a roll, perhaps by striking a match, what soldiers may be employed as citizens in their obligations to restore order, and those who are above the law and should perhaps be allowed to go over and join the rioters. The hon. Member who moved the Amendment told us that he objected to any Army, any Air Force or any fighting force at all and I recognise and am grateful for his frankness. He put before the Committee what was in his mind. He said that the people who joined the Army should he true to the class to which they belonged. I do not believe the Army is kept for that purpose. It is kept to be true to the nation and I can only say that if you wish to destroy the efficiency of the Army I can imagine few Amendments more likely to achieve that object than the one before the Committee.

Mr. LUNN: I am perfectly convinced that this Amendment will become the law of the land in the not far distant future. It. is unfortunate that hon. Members on the opposite side are not allowed to deal with the point so insistently made on this side that there is a
distinction in the Army between the officer and the ordinary soldier, and I believe it is admitted that it is true that au officer may object to undertake certain duties that he may be asked to do, and the private soldier is not in that position. We say in this Amendment that a man who has been a life-long trade unionist when he enlists in the army or is driven there through circumstances should have the option of declaring that he will not take part in shooting down his father or his brother. We think the civil force ought to be sufficient to deal with all trade disputes. Only this week we discussed another force, the special constables who are to add to the civil force. One thing I particularly want to mention. I come from the neighbourhood of Featherstone. I was at Featherstone in 1893 and saw the effect of what took place, and attended the funerals of the men who were shot down, and I know how the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Paisley (Mr. Asquith) was refused to be heard in Leeds not long after as a result of what took place at that time. The point with me is this: that more than one soldier refused to shoot on that occasion.

Captain BENN: I am sure the hon. Member does not want to misrepresent what occurred on that occasion. The military were summoned by the civil authorities and the Home Office had no option under the Statute but to comply with the request. Is not that a fact? I ask the hon. Gentleman whether that was not so and whether the Home Secretary had any knowledge of the circumstances?

Mr. LUNN: It is quite sufficient for me to say that I never charged him in what I said. That is not my position. I said I know what happened at Leeds as a result of what happened at Featherstone, and the blame attached to the right hon. Gentleman by the population of the West Riding for the events that took place.

An HON. MEMBER: The right hon. Gentleman was invited to lunch at Leeds last week.

Mr. LUNN: That is not surprising when you know what Liberalism is in Leeds. A soldier must undertake any kind of duty or he must be treated as an offender and dealt with accordingly. We are not discussing whether we should have an Army or not, but one important
matter that ought to be settled is that the Army ought never to be used in a trade dispute in this country. Men were told to shoot in the case of Featherstone and more than one refused to shoot. Is there any record of that? There ought to be a record of whether men did refuse, and it is because we wish to protect those who wished to refuse to shoot their relatives and friends that this Amendment is put down. I appeal to the Government that they ought to accept the Amendment. If they do not do so some other Government will do it before very long. It is absolutely necessary in the interests of equality in the treatment of our fellows that you should not, maintain an Army with a distinction between one section and another.

Mr. PRINGLE: The question which has been discussed for some time this morning is one which has in the past presented very real difficulties, and is going to raise on many occasions a very unfortunate grievance. It is not my purpose to enter into the merits of any of the incidents to which reference has been made. I wish however to raise this question in a special form in relation to the present Government. We are face to face with the question of whether the officer and the private soldier are on the same footing. The contention put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Bromley is that on the statements of Members of the present Government an officer is entitled to refuse duty to which he objects. There are hon. Members on the Government bench just now who have put forward that contention, and that contention, has been maintained by the head of the Government himself. I know of no other case in which the head of the Government in this country has said that an officer in the army is entitled to refuse duty to which he conscientiously objects. That is what justifies the Amendment. In a debate in this House on 23rd March, 1914, the present Prime Minister, then the Leader of the Opposition, not an irresponsible person, the heir presumptive to the premiership to which he has since succeeded, dealing with the situation at the Curragh, and to justify what the officers were alleged to have done said:
 The House knows that we on this side have from the first held the view that to coerce Ulster is an operation which no Government under existing conditions has a
right to ask the Army to undertake, and in our view, of course, it is not necessary to say that any officer who refuse is only per-funning his duty.
5.0 A.M.
That is one case. The importance of that submission is that it was made by the present Prime Minister, the head of this Government, for which all these gentlemen sitting on that Front bench are equally responsible now. At that time the Prime Minister sought to justify this as a constitutional doctrine of this country. That was why in an interruption I referred to the American War. Some hon. Gentlemen opposite did not know what I meant when I made reference to the American War, but I knew it as the main precedent quoted by the present Prime Minister, and if they jeered about the American War they are jeering at their own leader. He said there were cases of this kind in that war, and here you have what he said on 23rd March, 1914:
We in this period of our country's history are not going to be less fair than was the case in England 100 years ago. At that time Great Britain was engaged in a war against the American Colonies. What happened then was described in a book which is quoted in a newspaper which I saw yesterday, by Sir George Trevelyan:—
'That war was marked by a feature unique in English history. Not a few officers of every grade, who were for the main part distinguished by valour and ability, flatly refused to serve against the Colonies, and their scruples were respected by their countrymen in general and by the King and his Ministers as well.'
There you have the Prime Minister, on 23rd March, 1914, stating that an officer in the Army was entitled to refuse to perform a duty to which he conscientiously objected. If that is a sound doctrine Members of the House are entitled to put forward an Amendment and ask that the same doctrine should he extended to the private soldier. They are entitled to do that until the Government disavow the doctrine put forward by the Prime Minister. There is a dilemma. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Paisley (Mr. Asquith) did not accept that doctrine. Now, for the first time, we have a Prime Minister who says the officer who has a conscientious objection is entitled to down tools. [An HON. MEMBER: "Constitutionalism goes bang."] Then what is to be the position of the private soldier? Is there any hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench in a position to disavow that doctrine?
Is he going to throw over the Prime Minister without authority? The House is placed in a position in which we do not know what the position of the Government is on this vital matter. The Prime Minister is not here: there is nobody here to talk for him. We cannot tell what the view of the Prime Minister is, and it entirely depends upon his view what line the Committee is to take upon this Amendment. They cannot say in respect of this Amendment that they are applying the same principle to the officer as to the private soldier; until this doctrine is disavowed they cannot say that. There is no man on the Front Bench who can tell us the view of the Prime Minister, but I am glad to see that the First Lord of the Admiralty here, for he distinguished himself in these debates of 1914. He is one of the gentlemen who got information from the officers of the Curragh and put questions by the hundred to the hon. Member for Paisley. He was one of the confederates of the mutineers. In the present Government we have not only the Prime Minister who laid down this doctrine but we have, holding one of the most responsible positions, as head of one of the fighting services, one who has been in the past a confederate of mutineers and who has supported them in their mutiny in this House. I am not so sure about the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In regard to the question of Ulster my hon. Friend undoubtedly took a leading part, but. I have no speech of his and am not going to quote him in regard to a matter in which I have no evidence to convict him. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies took part in these Debates, and he was one of the supporters of this doctrine also.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I do not think what the Prime Minister did on the Curragh debates has anything to do with this.

Mr. PRINGLE: I do not want to go into history, and I am only dealing with the principle of the right of officers to refuse to obey orders to which they conscientiously object.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): Ds you want to quote me?

Mr. PRINGLE: I know the hon. Gentleman took part in the Debate, but I do not want to enter into details. I am merely dealing with hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who are now Ministers of the Crown, and who took sides on behalf of the men who refused to obey orders. The hon. and gallant Gentleman shakes his head and if he asserts that he did not associate himself I will at once accept the disavowal. I have not read the text of his speech and therefore I do not wish to suggest that he went further than he actually did. I have selected, as I pointed out, the Prime Minister because after all he is the most important. He is the head of the Government in a special sense because where would the Government be if he was not there? During a period of temporary incapacity we have seen to what straits the Government has been reduced and consequently he assumes a position of peculiar authority and responsibility in regard to the present Government. That is why his statement on this matter has a special importance and significance. That is why in my view so long as this statement in regard to officers is not disavowed the Committee is entitled to claim the same privilege for private soldiers.
I do not know whether any hon. Gentleman has had the opportunity of consulting him upon this Amendment. They have probably forgotten the indiscretion of March, 1914. The right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty is here; possibly he is a changed man now. We should be very glad to hear if he is. If he is not, of course, then we can claim that we must go into the Lobby in favour of this Amendment. We admire the consistency of the right hon. Gentleman. He has always been consistent. He has never flinched and as he never flinched I am quite sure that he would even at the expense of his present Ministerial position go into the Lobby in support of his convictions. Before coming to a decision on this particular Amendment we should know where the Prime Minister stands. If the Government will undertake to get an assurance on this matter from the Prime Minister then I think we ought to move to report Progress so that we may have that assurance before the Committee comes to a decision. I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Under Standing 'Order 23 I refuse to accept that Motion.

Mr. PRINGLE: Is it not important that on a matter of this kind the views of the Prime Minister should be ascertained?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Amery): rose in his place, and claimed to more, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the' Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 186; Noes, 113.

Division No. 88.]
AYES.
[5.14 a.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Pease, William Edwin


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Forestier-Walker, L.
Pennetather, De Fonblanque


Amery, Rt. Hen. Leopold C M.S.
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Penny, Frederick George


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Furness, G. J.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Garland, C. S.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Philipson. Hilton


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Goff, Sir R. Park
Pielou, D. P.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Pownall, Lleut.-Colonel Assheton


Banks, Mitchell
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Privett, F. J.


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Raine, W.


Barnston, Major Harry
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Becker, Harry
G wynne, Rupert S.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Berry, Sir George
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Rees. Sir Beddoe


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Halstead, Major D.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Remer, J. R.


Blundell, F. N.
Harrison, F. C.
Rentoul, G. S.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir p. (Chertsey)


Brass, Captain W.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Robertson, J. D (Islington, W.)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Briggs, Harold
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Ruggies-Brise, Major E.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Russell, William (Bolton)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bruton, Sir James
Hood, Sir Joseph
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Hopkins, John W. W.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Houfton, John Plowright
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Sandon, Lord


Button, H. S.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Shepperson, E. W.


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hudson, Capt. A.
Skelton, A. N.


Campion, Lleut.-Colonel W, R.
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Clarry, Reginald George
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Stanley, Lord


Clayton, G. C.
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Steel, Major S. Strang


Cobb. Sir Cyril
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Cope, Major William
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sutcliffe, T.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Terrell. Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Lorimer, H. D.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Titchfield, Marquess of


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Lumley, L. R.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement



McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)



Curzon, Captain Viscount
Manvlile, Edward
Tubbs. S. W.


Davidson, J. C. C.(Hemel Hempstead)
Margesson, H. D. R.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Mercer, Colonel H.
Waring, Major Walter


Dawson, Sir Philip
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Wells, S. R.


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Edge, Captain Sir William
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Morrison-Bell, Major A.C.(Honlton)
Willey, Arthur


Ednam, Viscount
Murchlson, C. K.
Winterton, Earl


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Nail, Major Joseph
Wise, Frederick


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Newman, Colonel J. R. p. (Finchley)
Wolmer, Viscount


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Evans, Ernest (Cardigan)
Nield. Sir Herbert
Yerburgh, H. D. T.


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh



Falcon, Captain Michael
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Gadfray
Paget, T. G.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Gibbs.


NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Batey, Joseph
Bonwick, A.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Aburtillery)
Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Bowdler, W. A.


Barnes, A.
Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Broad, F. A.


Bromfield, William
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Brotherton, J.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Saklatvala, S.


Buchanan, G.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Salter, Dr. A.


Buckie, J.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Sllvertown)
Sexton, James


Burgess, S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Cairns, John
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Cape, Thomas
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Charleton, H. C.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Simpson, J. Hope


Darblshire, C. W.
Kenworthy, Lleut.-Commander J. M.
Sitch, Charles H.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kirkwood, D.
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lansbury, George
Snell, Harry


Dudgeon, Major C, R.
Lawson, John James
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Leach, W.
Stephen, Campbell


Dunnico, H.
Lee, F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Ede, James Chuter
Linfield, F. C.
Sullivan, J.


Enwistle, Major C. F.
Lowth, T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Foot, Isaac
M'Entee, v. L.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, plalstow)


Gosling, Harry
McLaren, Andrew
Turner, Ben


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenall, T.
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, E.)
Warne, G. H.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Middleton, G.
Weir, L. M.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Welsh, J. C.


Groves, T.
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Westwood J.


Grundy, T. W.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Wheatley, J.


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Oliver, Goorge Harold
Whiteley, W.


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hardie, George D.
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hayday, Arthur
Phillipps, Vivian
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Potts, John S.
Wright, W.


Henderson, Rt. Hon A. (N'castle, E.)
Pringle, W. M. R.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Herriotts, J.
Riley, Ben
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hirst, G. H.
Ritson, J.
Mr. Lunn and Mr. Ammon.


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwicn)

Question put accordingly, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 101; Noes, 197.

Division No. 89.]
AYES.
[5.22 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Herriotts, J.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothweil)


Barnes, A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Saklatvala, S.


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Salter, Dr. A.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Sexton, James


Broad, F. A.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Bromfield, William
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Brotherton, J.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Simpson, J. Hope


Buchanan, G.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sitch, Charles H.


Buckie, J.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Burgess, S.
Kenworthy, Lleut.-Commander J. M.
Snell, Harry


Cairns, John
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Cape, Thomas
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Charleton, H. C.
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Leach, W.
Sullivan, J.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lee. F.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Linfield, F. C.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Dunnico, H.
Lowth, T.
Turner, Ben


Ede, James Chuter
M Entee, V. L.
Wallhead, Richard C,


Foot, Isaac
McLaren, Andrew
Warne, G. H.


Gosling, Harry
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Greenall, T.
Maxton, James
Weir, L. M.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Middleton, G.
Welsh, J. C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N )
Westwood, J.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wheatley. J.


Groves, T.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Whiteley, w.


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Paling, w.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Phillipps, Vivian
Wright, W.


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster. Newton)


Hayday, Arthur
Pringle, W. M. R.



Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Riley, Ben
Mr. Ammon and Mr. Lunn.


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Ritson, J.



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Astor. J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Banks, Mitchell


Barnett, Major Richard w.
Garland, C. S.
Pease, William Edwin


Barnston, Major Harry
George, Major G. L. (Pembroke)
Pennefather, De Fonblanque


Becker, Harry
Goff, Sir R. Park
Penny, Frederick George


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Berry, Sir George
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Perkins, Colonel E. K


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Greene, Lt.-Col- Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Philipson, Hilton


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Pielou, D. P.


Blundell, F. N.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Bonwick, A.
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Privett, F. J.


Bowdler, W. A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Raine, W.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Halstead, Major D.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Brass, Captain W.
Harrison, F. C.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Harvey, Major S. E.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Remer, J. R.


Briggs, Harold
Henn, Sir Sydney H
Rentoul, G. S.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hennessy. Major J. R. G.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Hlley, Sir Ernest
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Bruton, Sir James
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonol A.
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell, William (Bolton)


Button, H. S.
Hopkins, John W. W.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Cadogan, Major Edward
Houfton. John Plowright
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W, R.
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cayzer, sir C. (Chester, City)
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Sandon, Lord


Clayton, G. C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Shepperson, E. W.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Skelton, A. N.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Cope, Major William
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
King, Capt. Henry Douglas
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Lord


Croft, Lieut.-Colonel Henry Page
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Steel, Major S. Strang


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Curzon, Captain viscount
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Darbishire, C. W.
Lorimer, H. D.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Davidson, J. C. C.(Hemel Hempstead)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Sutcliffe, T.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Lumley, L. R.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Dawson, Sir Philip
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Manville, Edward
Titchfield, Marquess of


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Margesson, H. D. R.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, E.)
Tubbs, S. W.


Edge, Captain Sir William
Mercer, Colonel H.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Waring, Major Walter


Ednam, Viscount
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wells, S. R.


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Entwistle. Major C. F.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
White, Col. G. D. (Southport)


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Murchison, C. K.
Willey, Arthur


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Nail, Major Joseph
Winterton, Earl


Evans, Capt. H. Arthur (Leicester, E.)
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Wise, Frederick


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M,
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wolmer, Viscount


Falcon, Captain Michael
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J.(Westminster)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Nield, Sir Herbert
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Fawkes. Major F. H.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William



Forestier-Walker, L.
Paget, T. G.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


Furness, G. J,
Pattinson, S. (Horncastle)
Gibbs.

The CHAIRMAN: I have decided to allow the next four Amendments to be put separately, on the understanding that there be one Debate in the whole question of the death penalty.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: In that case, will you agree to let us debate a very vital question without the Closure being applied?

Mr. THOMAS: We are desirous of endeavouring to meet your wishes. It has obvious advantages. I gather by your suggestion that the Debate would
take a wider range. According to your suggestion the Amendments would not be debated separately. In return for that, perhaps the Government would give us some undertaking that reasonable time will be given and that we will not be closured.

NEW CLAUSE.— (Amendment Of Section 4).

In Section four of the Army Act, for the words "shall on conviction by court martial be liable to stiffer death, or such less' punishment at; is in this Act mentioned" there
shall be substituted the words "shall on conviction by court martial be liable to be kept in penal servitude for life or any shorter period (not less than three years), or to such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned.—[Mr. Lawson.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. LAWSON: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
The Amendment has the very definite object of abolishing the death penalty. The Section of the Act lays down that there should be certain definite penalties, and a series of offences is set down in the Section. Previous to the beginning of the War it was the general opinion in this country, as far as the public at any rate were concerned, that the death penalty for desertion and other things was intended to apply to a good many armies in the world but not to all armies. It was known, of course, that as far as soldiers were concerned there was a death penalty in military law. I understand that when Volunteers and the Militia and so forth met at stated periods this Section was read out to the men who heard it so often that they laughed at it and no one took the matter seriously. if the average citizen in this country before the War had been asked with what he associated the death penalty he would have said it was something connected with the jack-boot armies, but not with his army. I think it was a shock to the ideals of the people of this country to find that their own sons and brothers were being shot in cold blood. I wonder if the public understands exactly how many people were shot. It has usually been very difficult to get to know exactly how far the matter went. Sometimes there was a little news by way of a letter, sometimes a case appeared in the Press, but during the past four years it has been the most difficult thing in the world to find out how many people were shot upon the field for various offences. This afternoon I received an answer from the War Office which, as far as I am concerned, will be invaluable information. I am informed that the number of cases in which death sentences were carried out for desertion on active service during the late War was 264. [AN HON. MEMBER: "How many under 18?"] It is true there was a much larger number sentenced to death.

An HON. MEMBER: Is it in order for Members of this House to lie down on the benches.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is it in order for Members of the Front Bench to use the Front Bench as a sleeping bench?

The CHAIRMAN: It is consecrated by immemorial use.

Mr. LAWSON: The number of men who were really sentenced to death was well over 2,000, and it is to the credit of the Commander-in-Chief that the great bulk of the men were pardoned. In the case of 264 men, however, the sentence was carried out not for offences for which they would have been indictable in a civil court but simply for desertion. One thing was certain, there were no generals among these people. When Voltaire wrote his "Letters on England"—a book which made a considerable stir—Voltaire claimed the admiration of the people of France on the ground that occasionally we shot a general or an admiral to show there was no distinction among classes. He thought it was a matter for pride. I want to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that it was only the other ranks that were counted among these 264 men. There were times when the men deserted from their posts—a serious matter.

Captain BOWYER: Involving the lives of many others.

Mr. LAWSON: Is it not notorious that time and again there were occasions when generals during the late War were guilty of mistakes as a result of which thousands and thousands of men's lives were lost? What did they do on that occasion? They were recalled. I want to suggest that during the next war we should recall the other ranks instead of shooting them. I cannot understand why it should be said that a man highly placed who is guilty of the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives should be less guilty than a man who deserts his post and is only going to lose a few lives.

Lieut.-Colonel NALL: Does the hon. Gentleman allege that any man of the rank and file was shot for making a mistake?

Mr. LAWSON: I am going to allege that, too.

Lieut.-Colonel NALL: You may, but you cannot prove it.

Mr. LAWSON: And I will demonstrate it out of the mouth of a Member on the opposite Benches, a man who, with great feeling, in 1919 told this House that he had to sit upon a court-martial where five men were sentenced to death. Some of these men were young men eighteen years of age. Some of them were men whose wives and families were waiting for them at home. In many cases they were volunteers. War is barbarism, but there is nothing more barbaric than that a man should be tied up to a stake and. have twelve rifles levelled at him and be shot to death by his fellow countrymen. It is no wonder that it is very difficult to get information upon this matter. The hon. and gallant Member for North- West Hull (Colonel Lambert Ward) made a speech in this House in 1919 in which he asked the House to destroy the records of men who had been shot for desertion and in which he asked that the same care should be given to the graves of those men as was given to the graves of men who fell in the face of the enemy. He said:
I should like to obtain an assurance from the Secretary for War that there shall he no difference made between the graves of those men who were killed in action or died of wounds or disease and those unfortunate men who paid the penalty of their lives under Sections 4 and 12 of the Army Act or who, in other words, were tried by court-martial and shot for cowardice or desertion in face of the enemy. I bring this forward because it has been on my conscience for some time.
Courage was a very prominent feature during the war, but I think the bravest men were those who admitted very often that they were afraid. The hon. Gentle- man continued:
 It has been on my conscience for some time, as, unfortunately, during the very early days of the War, the early winter of 1914, it was my unfortunate duty to sit on a court-martial at which five men were sentenced to death. I do not know in how many cases that sentence was commuted. I felt I could not inquire, and I thought it better not to ask, but now that the War is over I want, if possible, to make amendment, because during the whole sitting of that Court I had an uncomfortable feeling that even with my limited knowledge of law I could have got each one of those men off on a technicality if I had been in a position to act as a friend. I knew nothing about courts-martial in those days. What does an ordinary Territorial captain know about courts- martial? Nothing, less than nothing. I was sitting on a court-
martial for this reason, that the brigade had been decimated; indeed, it had been practically annihilated. Out of 130 officers who left England a month or two previously there was scarcely one left of sufficient length of service to entitle him to sit on a court-martial. The battalion to which I had the honour to belong was called upon to find a very large proportion of officers for court-martial duty, and I was called upon to serve. I ask the House not to dismiss this petition by the remark that these men were cowards and deserved their fate. They were not cowards in the accepted meaning of the word. At any rate, they did not display one-tenth part of the cowardice that was displayed by the crowds in London who went flocking to the tube stations on the first alarm of an air raid. These men, ninny of them, volunteered in the early days of the War to serve their country. They tried and they failed. In many cases they were the victims of circumstances. Admiral Byng is not the only man in history who has been shot in order to encourage the others. In many cases, it was necessary to make an example of them.
There is one who showed extraordinary courage in stating the facts as he found them in actual practice, and I want to ask hon. Members to dismiss from their minds the idea that those men who were shot were cowards. We ask men to take on one of the most awful contracts that a man ever undertook. If a man in civilian life makes a contract, it does not matter very much if he breaks it. Indeed if he is a minor the contract in certain circumstances does not hold at all. If he is under twenty-one years of age it may not apply, but if a boy of eighteen years of age enlists he has to accept a contract which involves death. It. involves a great many things. It involves going on I o the barrack square and giving up his mind and his will completely. A barrack square is one of the most soul-killing places on God's earth. A boy by this contract has to take on himself the onus of giving his time and his body, and it involves even the penalty of death in certain circumstances. I say that is a contract we ought not to ask any man to accept. It is true he gets something in return. It may be said he may want adventure. It is quite true he gets it all right he gets more than his fill in a very short time. It may be said that he freely accepts the contract, hut that is not true. The great bulk of the men to-clay who have accepted that contract since the Armistice have accepted it under duress of the stomach. It is passing strange that in these days of ours of the twentieth century we will clothe
a man, feed him, and give him a horse to ride upon if needs be, that we will give him a passage overseas, send him to sunny climes, that, in abort, we will do anything in the work of death and destruction but we will riot even consider the possibility of doing something for the things of life and construction. They accept this contract which involves so much, and I say they accept it under duress. During my time as member of the House I have heard a great deal about court martial. I have bad the report of the Army Select Committee on the investigation into court-martial methods, and it all reads very fine. In actual practice when the machine is going, and the guns are roaring, and there is chaos and destruction over hundreds of miles I think that in actual practice the arrangements as laid down for courts martial do not quite work out. On many grounds, from the point of view of the contract, from the point of view of humanity, from the point of view of fairness and justice, we ought really to consider the abolition of the death penalty. I would draw the attention of the House to one fact which came to my knowledge quite recently. I was talking to a man who had been in the Foreign Legion for some years. The average person would think that in the Foreign Legion punishments were very severe. I thought that resort to the death penalty would be greater than in almost any other fighting force, and yet I am informed by this man that there is no such thing as the death penalty for desertion in the face of the enemy or abandoning positions. [An HON. MEMBER: "I thought they got shot on the spot!"] As a matter of fact they do not get shot at all. The maximum penalty is five years for desertion. [An HON. MEMBER: "That is not so!"] I am relying upon my authority, and what. I am saying is in harmony with my knowledge of the man's veracity.
6.0 A.M.
There is another side of this problem—there is the ranker's side. It is seldom we get news even from the men who have been in the vicinity of the men shot. The fighting men themselves do not place any reflection upon these men. Here is an incident I am going to repeat to this House of a man who himself was in prison with a sentence of 10 years. He finally had his sentence repealed and was reinstated in rank as a non-commissioned officer through the good
activity and influence of the right hon. Gentleman the member for Derby (Mr. Thomas). This man came back to his work as a signalman, and he tells the facts as he knew them. These are the facts as they are going among the workers and as they are being told from street corner to street corner by men who knew. I will read this article from the "Forward." Although some hon. Members may not have any very high opinion of the "Forward," I was never so much moved in my life as I was in reading this article. The man heads his article:
Reminiscences of the Great War for Liberty: Devon Lads Shot at Dawn.
They came from the same county as I come from, arid he tells his own story. This is the story, and I am going to accept the story because I have met him. He says:
It all happened when I was a sojer: The month of December, 1916, found me in a filthy manure soaked barn—a British rest billet! All through one terribly cold wet day we had marched from the British front at Arras to this back area 20 kilometers behind the lines.
[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] It is all very well for hon. Members to sneer and laugh. They are not going to do it on this matter. I have handled a serious matter in a serious manner, and I am not going to allow anyone to laugh at this serious question.
At that time the ' war correspondent of the Daily Mail' had been sending home some ridiculous reports regarding the love and fellowship existing between officers and men. The flowery phrases from his ever-flowing beautiful pen depicted us as a beautiful band of brave British brethren, The people at home swallowed the soothing dope—the ancient armchair critics egged on every available pint of young blood—my mates laughed cynically. Well, said he, as I eat down to write a letter to the Harms-worth Press in order to tell the facts, I pointed out not how we were winning the war, but just exactly how we should lose it. I exposed the enormous wastage of our available forces, the diversion of battalions of bayonet strength to the whims and fancies of the officers; I appealed to the Mail ' to ginger up the War Office to the importance of utilising our men as soldiers, and not as wet-nurses to the star-glad gentry—that we might get on with or get out of this seemingly everlasting conflict. Of course my letter had to be censored. Honest idiot that I was, I made no effort to evade it. I did think first of dodging local censorship by using a green envelope,' but ultimately sent it through the ordinary channel.…Next morning I was put under
arrest and hauled before the General.…When I first entered the improvised military prison I found it already occupied by five more Tummies.

The CHAIRMAN: The writer appears to me to be attacking the system of Army punishments and sentences generally. This particular Amendment has only to do with the death penalty.

Mr. LAWSON: I was reading one of the few instances in which a man has told the facts as he has seen them. He tells us he was in an improvised prison with five men, and they told him what the trouble was. They said that orders had been given that if a certain post was lost somebody would be in for it. General Headquarters would want to know why. Well, it was lost. There was an attempt to use an elementary kind of gas cylinders, and so the Germans got round and it was lost. The men were court-martialled. Two were sentenced to 10 years and three of them were sentenced to death. And this is what he says:
'Come out, you' ordered the Corporal of the guard to me. I crawled forth. It was snowing heavily. 'Stand there!' he said, pushing me between two sentries. 'Quick march!' and away we went, not as I dreaded, to my first taste of pack drill,' but out and up the long street to an R.E. dump. There the police corporal handed in a chit,' whereupon three posts, three ropes and a spade were given me to carry back. Our return journey took us past the guard room, up a short hill until we reached a secluded spot surrounded by trees.…Certain measurements were made in the snow, after which I was ordered to dig three holes at stipulated distances apart. I began to wonder. …Could it be…? No, perhaps spies…perhaps oh, perhaps only my fancy.…The next scene a piercingly cold dawn; a crowd of brass hats, the medical officer, and three firing parties. Three stakes a few yards apart and a ring of sentries around the woodland to keep the curious away. A motor ambulance arrives conveying the doomed men. 'Manacled and blindfolded they are helped out and tied up to the stakes. Over each man's heart is placed an envelope. At the sign of command the firing parties, twelve to each, align their rifles on the envelopes. The officer in charge holds his stick aloft and as it falls 36 bullets usher the souls of three Kitchener's men to the great unknown. As a military prisoner I helped clear the traces of that triple murder. I took the posts down…I helped carry those bodies towards their last resting place; I collected all the blood-soaked straw and burnt it. Acting upon police instructions I took all their belongings from the dead men's tunics (discarded before being shot). A few letters, a pipe, some fags, a
photo. I could tell you of the silence of the military police after reading one letter from a little girl to dear Daddy,' of the blood-stained snow that horrified the French peasants; of the chaplain's confession that braver men he had never met than those three men he prayed with just before the fatal dawn…I could take you to the graves of the murdered.
Is it not a fact within the knowledge of Members of this House that time and again when men were pardoned they went forward and gave evidence of the greatest courage, demonstrating that 'anything might happen to the bravest men at a certain moment under certain circumstances? The time has come when, whatever may be the alternative penalty this House lays down, that the time has arrived when, in the interests of the men who may serve in the days to come, in the interests of the honour of this country we ought to abolish this death penalty, and I have great pleasure in moving.

Major PAGET: It is naturally with very deep feelings that any soldier or anyone who has been a soldier approaches this subject, because there is not the very slightest doubt that the most painful duty any officer can be detailed to is to sit on a death sentence court-martial and feel that in his hands rests the life of another man. I can assure all hon. Members of this Committee that if there is a possible loophole an officer can find, remembering the oath he takes, to save the life of the prisoner before him I am absolutely certain that I have never met an officer who would not avail himself of that loophole. I think the very numbers the hon. Member has quoted—I do not know whether the hon. Member included all death sentences or only those for desertion—

Mr. LAWSON: Just those for desertion.

Major PAGET: When one thinks there were five million of men under arms, mostly for the matter of between three or four years, and when we remember the magnificent discipline all through our Armies, I do not think we would be very wise to alter that system of discipline so rapidly as is suggested in this new Clause, because I do not think it would in any way effect the result we all desire. After all, war is an extremely bloody business, and in dealing with the contract which the hon. Member has alluded to we
must remember that when all is said and done, it is a soldier's job to kill. After one had been out to the front for some time, one lived under absolutely un-believe-able conditions which have been rightly described as the life of a sewer rat, one slept and walked with death always as his nearest neighbour. A friend of mine who was in my battery said to me "Lor' lumme, guvnor, Dart-moor was heaven to this."

Mr. J. JONES: He was a pal of yours?

Major PAGET: Yes, he was a pal of mine and a pal I would own anywhere, and I am not ashamed to say I had a pal who had been in Dart-moor. There must be a death penalty which could induce a man, whose vitality was low at the time, not when he was well fed and feeling fit, but in the grey dawn when you are hanging on by your eyelids, cold, exhausted, hungry and deadly frightened to go forward. No man who has been under concentrated shell-fire for any length of time does not know what deadly fear is. One must have something to counteract that, and if one knows that the only alternative to not hanging on and chancing death in front when the moral is low and the vitality is low: when one knows that to run means only disgrace and death, that has a very great effect at the bad moments of which I am speaking. There is no alternative. Panic is like a germ; it spreads and becomes infectious. I know of more than one case where an N.C.O. saved the situation by shooting an officer who panicked. It is at a moment when the man's brain goes and his self-control goes that the death penalty not only saves the life of the individual but saves the whole situation and enables him to hang on. In regard to what has been said about the Foreign Legion, I wish to say that I had a brother officer who served in the Foreign Legion and he told me that the maximum penalty is five years spent in what is called a punitive battalion where, as it was described to me, death would be a happy release from the miseries a man has to undergo in some of the worst climates and doing hard manual work under distressing conditions and with abominable food.
As to what the hon. Member (Mr. Lawson) read from a paper, I can only
say that the man who wrote a letter of that sort was a man who would be spreading disaffection all through the Service, and that is the greatest crime a man can commit. There may have been bad officers, and there certainly were, but I have always met with the most loyal support, and in many instances deep personal kindness, which men rendered to me outside their duty.

Mr. LAWSON: I did not wish to suggest that there was any laxity or tendency to over-strictness on the part of the officers. There are scallywags on both sides.

Major PAGET: I was simply alluding to the terms of the letter the hon. Member read out. I think there is in the British Army, more than in any army in the world, a less respect for the mere signs of rank and a great respect, whether it comes from the officers or the men, for the man himself and not for the uniform he wears. I therefore feel that with great regret in a way, I cannot support this Clause, because I do not feel it would in a great war tend to the safety of life. That it would have a demoralising effect at times when everything that a man wants is gone and when he is practically a lunatic is certain. He should have the fixed idea that in front was a chance of life, but that in going back there was nothing but death and disgrace.

Mr. SULLIVAN: I want to support the Amendment for the reason that sometimes mistakes are made. During a period of detention there would be some opportunity of a mistake being cleared up. I assisted the Government during the War by recruiting among the mining population and I know of a case of a young man in a mining village who could not get work for two years before the War because he was mentally deficient. Somehow or other he was passed into the Army by a doctor and the next we heard of him was that he was executed for deserting his post. That was murder and nothing else. The man was mentally weak, everybody in the village knew it and his mother knew it. If there was any justification for the death sentence it was in the case of the doctor who had passed him into the Army. I have nothing to say against the speech of the hon. and gallant Member for Bosworth (Major Paget). I think his tone was good and sympathetic, but
we on this side of the Committee think killing is a dreadful thing, and I was reminded in the course of this Debate that nearly everybody in this House believes we should have no more war. If we believe in that we do not require these penalties. I hope the next war is a long way off, but I want to warn the hon. and gallant Member that the probability is that the next war will strike mole people than the active combatant and that if the death penalty has to be served out to the soldier it might be possible that it will go behind the soldier and reach somebody else, and I sincerely hope the hon. Members on the opposite side, who we believe act from conviction and think that it is essential to keep this dreadful alternative, will change their views after the speech of the hon. Member on this side who told us about the age of the boy who joined the Army. Everybody knows there were lads of 17 and 18 who were practically schoolboys with none of the training and feeling of men. It is quite possible for these lads under dreadful fire such as the hon. Member has mentioned to make a slip and instead of getting a chance to be hurled into the unknown. People get to know that and feel strongly against a Government which commits crimes of that, kind.

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Gwynne): We have listened to three speeches which have been of a sincere and serious tone, but so Far as I can see the criticisms in regard to the Clause have not been directed against the way the sentences are carried out, but rather against the penalty itself. There is, of course, a body of opinion in this country who say that under no circumstances should the death penalty be carried out either in civil or military cases. As long as we do recognise in this country that there are cases in which the full death penalty should be exercised I think nobody would really dispute the fact that if the death sentence should be carried out on the man who kills another man by fighting or murder, it should equally be carried out when we are in a state of war, and the various acts which are enumerated in these Clauses are carried out. For example, if the death penalty is to be carried out at all, surely a man who behaves treacherously or a man who imperils the safety of His Majesty's Forces is deserving of death. My duty is really to point out to the
Committee that the Government cannot give way on this question of doing away entirely with the death sentence. I would point out to the Committee that under existing Regulations men who are sentenced to death have really a greater chance of leniency by court-martial than they have if they were tried by civil courts. What exactly is the process they go through? This matter was very carefully considered by an impartial body of men under the presidency of Mr. Justice Darling, and after taking evidence on this question they issued a Report and they say that during the recent War not a single officer or soldier was sentenced to death by a court-martial in the United Kingdom. Abroad a certain number of: death sentences were carried out. In each case they were carried out only after personal consideration by and upon the orders of the Commander-in-Chief, and after the Judge Advocate-General or his deputy had advised. Moreover, when considering them the Commander-in-Chief almost invariably had before him recommendations from the officers commanding the Unit to which they belonged, the Brigade, the Division, the Corps, and the Army. That means that if a man were condemned to death, before the sentence was carried out it was considered carefully by six different men, and surely a man had a better chance than if he had been tried by a civil court and had only the chance of a recommendation to mercy by the Home Secretary.
The hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) read a letter from a paper named the "Forward" in which a most distressing case was set forth. He cannot expect me to answer that, when he has not one tittle of evidence to prove that it was true. I cannot conceive that after going through the process which must have taken place before any man was condemned that this distressing case could have been carried out. To prove that I would remind him that on his own statement, out of a large number of cases in which sentence of death was passed, the death sentence was not carried alit in 89 per cent. of the men. That shows that leniency was exercised to a very full extent, and hon. Members opposite feel very strongly that the death sentence should in no case be carried out, but I would remind them that at the present moment a very few miles from these
shores, in the Irish Free State, against which hon. Members opposite seem to have no complaint, more death sentences have been carried out in a few months than there have been in this country for many years. We have got the death penalty, and as long as we have got it we must see that we have an opportunity of enforcing it in the Army.

Mr. THOMAS: I am one of those who believe that there never was an occasion when the public conscience was so aroused against capital punishment in general than at this moment. Recent events, and especially the hanging of that unfortunate woman, gave an opportunity to test public opinion in a very marked way. I hope the time will come shortly when this House will be given a chance of debating the general question, when I am sure the very strong volume of opinion in the House will reflect the greater volume of opinion outside for the abolition of the death penalty. The Financial Secretary rather challenged the statement of my hon. Friend in his quotation from the "Forward." That quotation was taken originally from the "Railway Review," and the boy mentioned I knew from birth. He grew up with me on the railway. He was on my engine, and I can remember the morning I got the letter intimating that he had received 10 years. The Member for Boss and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson) was then at the War Office. I promptly went to the War Office and asked at least that an investigation should be made. The investigation was made. The lad was acquitted. He rendered good service after, and he told me that to-day he is prepared to go with any British officer and direct him to the spot where these lads were shot. You have only got to talk to this boy about the impression on his mind of the torture of these young boys who were shot. If hon. Members would only listen first hand to what took place there would be no hesitation about their voting for this Amendment. The objections briefly stated by the other side are that this penalty is necessary in the interests of discipline, and because it would be impossible to maintain an army if this penalty were not exacted.
That, in short, is the case presented from the other side. In order to test that let us visualise the circumstances which bring it about. My own boy did
not wait. At 17½ he joined. To us he was a mere child. He knew nothing about the Army and had never handled a gun. His whole training had been in the opposite direction. When such a lad went into the Army should anyone wonder if his nerves would go under some terrible circumstances of fire. But under the military law such a boy could be charged with cowardice in front of the enemy. If there is substance in the case for the other side you must show that a boy when he was tempted to run away would say to himself "I will be shot if I do" and that is sufficient to make him do his duty. That is not only inconceivable but foreign to the facts of the case. I will challenge any right hon. Gentlemen to get up from that bench and say that they believe for a moment that these boys—and many of them were boys—thought of the punishment that would follow.

Major PAGET: I certainly think it would be the case, and in many cases I know it.

Mr. THOMAS: I pay tribute to the sincerity and absolutely human speech of my hon. and gallant Friend. I will give the details of a case—for obvious reasons I am not mentioning names—where a. very young battalion under exceptional circumstances took flight. The officers had to go round and shoot. I know some who were shot—boys—not by a court martial. A panic had set in and no one would pretend that a whole regiment of boys under such circumstances would say to themselves that the death penalty followed if they ran away. The whole circumstances and atmosphere were foreign to such considerations. In voting for this Amendment we do not say that there must not be some disciplinary measure. We give you the alternative of penal servitude and, if you are right in your contention, and if a soldier has got this particular penalty in mind, will he say. "If I run away it will be penal servitude for life." We have got to look at this thing from the human point of view. We all agree that the cases are, happily very small in number. I believe the fact that they are very few in number show that that kind of offence or crime is happily rare in the Army. My hon. Friend gave indication of the kind of care with which this matter has been considered and he indicated that Mr. Justice Darling presided over a committee. But
any member of this House, or a layman sitting down to review the circumstances of the death penalty, would be in an entirely different atmosphere, and the learned judge has been trained in a different atmosphere where he has dealt with murderers.
It is pointed out that the Judge Advocate General is always consulted on the matter, but the hen. Gentleman knows perefectly well this is a matter of psychology. The Judge Advocate General is not on the spot of the actual incident. You will be making a mistake in your own interests if you argue that them has been no change in the feeling of the people of this country on this point. If it is to be held you can only maintain your Army by the fear of the death penalty, and men will not do their duty in battle without it, all your argument about the love of country and people who are prepared to die for the cause vanishes. I am not going to say a word about the manner in which the Front Bench has met us in this matter. We have discussed very important questions without passion and with good temper on both sides. They have given us nothing. We have enabled them to have relays and to take rest and we have not protested. We have, how-veer, reached a stage where you should be more generous. You have been generous in speeches now the time has come to be generous in substance. You are being asked to consider something big and human, and whether you refuse it now the time will shortly come when it will be conceivably far better in your interests and in the interests of the Army to respond to this appeal which is right and just. The Government should show that it wishes to do what is right and just and not merely delay this until you are compelled to do it by circumstances which will be far more disastrous than the circumstances of conceding it.

Mr. J. H. SIMPSON: I desire to point out that the whole of the arguments are equally applicable to the ordinary penalty of capital punishment in the Criminal Courts of this land. The penalty in the Army is an alternative penalty, whereas in an ordinary murder case before the Criminal Courts in this land the only penalty is death. In cases which might very often be far worse than murder there is the alternative penalty of penal servitude for life, and one cannot
imagine a greater crime than a deliberate sacrifice on the part of a soldier to his regiment or to his country's interest. Why should a man escape the penalty when a man at home who has committed a single murder is hanged? It seems to me that we are liable to allow sentiment to overcome common sense in this matter. Every one of us has sympathy for the man who has failed by fear. At the same time, we have to maintain the punishment as a deterrent against the wicked man who runs away on purpose and causes disaster. In order to have adequate punishment in such cases, I think the sentence of death or, alternatively, penal servitude should be maintained.

Mr. GAVAN DUFFY: I listened to the excellent speech of the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson). He has made out a very reasoned case for the acceptance of the Amendment and he has been fortified by another excellent speech from the right hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas). But in my humble judgment the best speech in favour of this Amendment was made by the hon. and gallant Member for Bos-worth (Major Paget). If I remember clearly, his statement was that a man who is cold, hungry and tired, whose mind was gone, who was really incapable of thinking, that the only alternative to compel that man to carry on was the fear of the death sentence that was behind him. I venture to say that in no country in the world, in no Court of Justice, would the sentence of death be carried out upon a man whose mentality was such. Not long since this House passed an Act to protect women who had murdered their infants from having the death sentence passed upon them, and when we are told that 89 per cent. of the death sentences that have been passed upon soldiers have been remitted it only shows the degree of carelessness in the way these sentences have been imposed. The right hon. gentleman who answered from the Government Bench said that he cannot do away altogether with the death sentence at the present time, and may I suggest, having regard to the fact that the first Amendment is for an alteration to Section 6 of the Army Act, that the right hon. Gentleman might find words that would be possibly acceptable to the Mover of this Amendment without accepting it in its
entirety. If we turn to Section 6 of the Army Act we are told that a soldier who does violence to any person bringing provisions or supplies to the Forces or commits any offence against the property or person of any inhabitant of or resident in the country in which he is serving, such a man might have the sentence of death imposed upon him. I am not quite sure that that has been rigidly carried out in the past.
Only a year or two ago those unspeakable friends who were sent to Ireland in the guise of the Black and Tans destroyed and looted property, and I am not quite sure whether they were executed and shot down according to military law. The same thing applied to an earlier period of our history in South Africa. Another Section says that any person who irregularly detains or appropriates to his own corps, battalion, or detachment any provision or supply proceeding to the Forces contrary to any orders issued in that respect may also suffer death. I remember during the War one case that came particularly under my notice of a young boy who joined the Army when be was 17 years of age, and yet after he had been in the War for something like 18 months, and having been 76 hours continuously on duty, he was then put on sentry guard, but, unfortunately, fell asleep, and was shot for deserting his post. I venture to say that any system that imposes a brutal sentence of that character stands absolutely condemned. As the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby has pointed out, there has been since the War a great wave of sympathy, a great wave of humanity passing over us, and has even touched the War Office, the last place on God's earth where one would ever expect to find any touch of humanity. Field Punishment No. 1 has gone. Many things will have to go. The old Junker method of conducting the Army system of this country cannot be maintained to-day. It is entirely out of sympathy with modern ideas and modern demands. The time is now ripe when this House ought to accept, if not the Amendments in their entirety, and if they cannot do away with the death penalty altogether, that they should certainly revise the rules of these barbarous proposals. If we cannot abolish war we can make war at least as decent as such a thing will allow.

7.0 A.M.

Captain BERKELEY: It is quite clear that no civilised country wants to exact the death penalty in the case of young lads, and I am sure that is not the intention of the Act of Parliament. I was very much impressed by what was said as to the possibility of some alternative formula which would satisfy the Mover of this Amendment. It occurs to me to ask whether the Under-Secretary of State for War would not be prepared, in view of the great success which was attained during the War by what I believe was called the Suspension of Sentences Act under which sentences of penal servitude and imprisonment—I do not think it applied to the death penalty —were suspended and the man returned to his unit and a report was made after a period and the case reviewed—whether the right hon. Gentleman would not be prepared to assent to a proviso in this Section of the Act to this effect: "Provided that the death penalty shall be suspended in the case of first offenders for a period of six months for the purpose of a further report being made by the commanding officer of the condemned man." I do not suggest that the phraseology is right; that could be drawn up by the Law Officers of the Crown.

Mr. SNELL: It is a matter of great regret to the Members on this side of the House that the Financial Secretary to the War Office said this Amendment would not be accepted. It has never been suggested from these benches that it was an attack upon the officers who had the unfortunate responsibility of administering this law. The supreme penalty of the law is a dreadful thing for the men themselves; but it is even more dreadful for those who have to administer it. What we are trying to do is to offer an alternative which would relieve the officer upon whom this duty is imposed and to see if we cannot provide an arrangement whereby every security would be given to the Army and the commanding officer and yet delay hasty executions in order that other feelings and thoughts may intervene. The officer is placed, in present circumstances, under extremely difficult conditions. He may have known the man. whose execution he orders; he may have had a respect for him, and the man himself may have been, in ordinary vocation, a really good fellow.
but has not been equal to the supreme test. I want to say a word about the human equation in this matter. In the last war all men within the possible age were compelled to serve in the Army, but all men were not physically suited for the tasks placed upon them. To pass a law of this kind and to shoot without discrimination men who offend is to assume that all men are equal in power of resistance to temptation and in nerve strength. Human beings do differ. Some are gifted in one way and some in another, and it is so in the matter of war. We put these boys in the dreadful position which has been described. Weariness, temptation, fear seizes hold of them, the power of the will stops and at a given moment they run away little frightened things. There is no stopping them, and to say that keeping all these penalties on the books would act as a deterrent to them is to misunderstand the nature of the crime. He who deserts in face of the enemy does so because his will power is less strong than that of other men. What evil result would come to the country or the Army if in place of the death penalty, we imposed a sentence of penal servitude for life? It would not, in my judgment, put any additional risk upon the Army or the nation as a whole. We know that leniency on the whole inspires confidence.
It occurs to me to ask the Committee whether it realises that there have been precedents for the thing we are asking the Government to do. There was a great man within the last century whose name will pass down in history and be revered by all who speak our language. He refused time after time to sanction the death penalties that his generals imposed upon their soldiers. When Grant sentenced a man with the death penalty, Abraham Lincoln steadily refused to allow it to be carried out. Does anyone suggest that in consequence, Lincoln got anything but the best from his army or that he would have got better things from it if he had allowed his men to be executed? Those who are students of American history will remember the case of William Scott of Vermont He was caught sleeping at his post and Grant sentenced him to be shot. But Lincoln said, "What good will it do to shoot him?" By that he meant "What good will it do America and humanity?" He pardoned the boy and the result was
that a great wave of confidence passed through the men engaged in the army throughout America. They felt that the father of the State was in reality a father to them, and as he loved them, they loved him in return and gave him the best they had. I cannot help feeling that if we had something of the same principle in our Army it would bring not disaster but would relieve the officers of a very grievous and terrible burden, it would inspire confidence among the men, and our country and humanity would be the better for the change.

Captain BENN: We all feel we have been engaged in a close discussion of an extremely difficult subject, and I myself am going to support a suggestion which perhaps might be accepted by the Government and might do something to case the difficulties we are all feeling in reference to this question. I must say I feel it is absolutely wrong to compare the offences for which soldiers are executed in war time to the crime of murder in civil life. That is a total misapprehension. I would rather he a man who had gone out voluntarily and then done something which caused me to be executed, than to be a man who had never gone out at all. I totally disagree with the view of the Financial Secretary to the War Office, who says if you retain the death sentence for some brutal, squalid murder in peace time, that argument has something to do with the infliction of the death sentence in the Army. The Army is quite different. The only argument that has any weight is that war is a state of terror, and to counteract one terror you must have a greater terror on the other side. Is it a well-founded argument? The Financial Secretary himself began to answer it when he said you must remember that in most cases the sentence is not carried out. If the soldier is aware that in most cases the sentence will not be carried out, what becomes of him? He knows that out of the thousands that have been sentenced only 200 have been executed, and, therefore, the argument that he himself is so overcome by the terror of execution that he faces the terror of battle loses a great deal of its weight. I think it is a perfectly sound rule of law that you should rather have moderate penalties which you enforce than violent penalties which are seldom enforced. As a matter of fact my own belief is that this argu-
ment of terror loses much of its weight from the number of offences for which the penalty of death can be given. Under Section 6 of the Army Act of 1881 such offences number from A to K. Some of them are of a comparatively venial character. In reply to what the Noble Lord and the hon. Member on the other side said I do not think, as a matter of fact I am informed, that in point of fact in deciding who is to be executed and who is to be let off it is not so much the gravity of the offence that is considered as the need for enforcing discipline in the battalion. I think it is the Commanding Officer who ought to be punished if that is the state of affairs. If that is so what becomes of the argument that this penalty must be retained? I believe in some cases it is the bravest who run the risk of committing offences that bring this punishment upon them. At Suvla sometimes some men took some sort of opium that rendered them more liable to sleep.
The hon. and gallant Member for Central Nottingham (Captain Berkeley) has suggested that it might be possible to enlarge the little power which already exists in the Army Act of 1881 under Section 57, by which the confirming authority may suspend for such time as seems expedient the execution of a sentence. What I understand him to suggest is that instead of merely making it permissive for the confirming authority it should be made the right of the condemned person to have the sentence suspended for a certain period in which he could show the stuff he is made of.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I am sorry I cannot agree to the moving appeal that has been made to me on this painful subject. The Debate has not really produced any substitute for this very terrible penalty, the necessity for which I am sure we all regret. The hon. and gallant Gentleman who has just spoken suggested that we might impose the obligation on the confirming officer in the case of a first offender of substituting six months with his unit to try to give him an opportunity of making good. My hon. Friend has acted as a confirming officer himself and he knows how little use that would be in many cases. The other alternative put forward is that of penal servitude. I am afraid that is no alternative. It means exchanging the hell and danger of life in the trenches for the certainty of being
kept in a place of absolute safety for the duration of the war, and an invariable amnesty after the war. That is no deterrent.

Mr. THOMAS: Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman apply himself to the point I made, to the question of the penalty for offences other than what would be called deliberate cowardice in face of the enemy, and to the effect that the penalty of shooting would have on the mentality of a man whose nerve fails him? Does he say that men are not shot for that?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I would he far from asserting that men are not shot for that. You cannot see inside a man's brain. In the case of such offences as sentry sleeping on his post, from what occurred in the South African War and in the recent War there is no doubt that this particular class of offence does react very quickly to the deterrent of capital punishment. Lord Roberts in the South African War for a long time commuted all death penalties for men forsaking their posts. The same thing happened in Mesopotamia and in each case this offence became more frequent. One must be guided by commanders in the field who have found from experience that some of these crimes have a tendency to increase unless from time to time, and in the most sparing way possible, recourse is had to the extreme penalty. Cases are always examined with the greatest care. No man is ever shot for deserting his post if he has had a very tiring experience just previously. You must remember that the capital penalty is enforced not in peace, but in war. Our mentality has now become rather remote from war, but I must urge on the Committee the un-wisdom of throwing away in peace time a safeguard of the Army which those who have borne responsibility in war consider necessary.

Mr. MORRISON: The position on both sides is becoming more clearly defined and the Government's position is that they desire to retain the death penalty as a means of imposing discipline and we deny that the death penalty is a means of enforcing discipline. May I give my own experience. When I landed at Le Havre an enthusiastic volunteer we were paraded and had read out in orders a statement that certain soldiers had been charged with a certain offence and
sentenced to death, and that the sentence had been carried out and that was always read out to young soldiers arriving in France as a means of enforcing discipline and so far as I was concerned, and the same applied to thousands of others the effect was exactly the opposite and my feelings of enthusiasm began to die out when I found the methods adopted to enforce discipline. The first time I was under fire when a shell exploded, I was interested; that was all.
I have been in the Army and know I had no fear whatever when I saw the first shell burst. I was interested and anxious to see what had happened. After a time I began to be a little afraid and after I had been over eighteen months I had a feeling of fear. That was after I saw one shell kill seventeen men and I happened to be one of the lucky ones who escaped. After that the feeling of fear grew. A friend of mine was on three occasions specially commended for saving wounded men under fire. He got more and more frightened. When the Germans made the tremendous attack on March 21, we were driven back forty or fifty kilometres. He and I and others were on the road for nearly a week. We had slept little for days, had little to eat and were in had condition. We arrived at the town of Albert and we were put into wagons in the station to sleep. They were covered trucks. A German airman came over and raced up and down firing his machine gun. A bomb he dropped blew down part of a building at the side of the station. My friend lost his reason, jumped out of the wagon and rushed down the line shouting at the top of his voice. We dragged him back under cover. If that had happened elsewhere he would have been liable to be shot. I want to point this out. It has never been suggested that Australian troops were loss brave and courageous or stuck to their work any less than British or other troops. The death penalty was never applied to Australian soldiers and every one of them knew they were not liable to be court-martialled and shot as British soldiers were.

Mr. HARDIE: No two men receive the same condition under the same nervous circumstances, and I gave you a case of an accident 250 fathoms down and one mile from the shaft. Twenty-four men
had been cut off by an explosion, and of that number eight were boys of 14 years of age. Fear should not be classed in the same category as cowardice, and I have never met a coward yet. The young boys, not having the grip of their elders, had to be looked to first because their nerves went first. When we got out after eight hours and reached the surface, it was found there was still another section where men had to be relieved and yet these boys who might in the Army have been classed as cowards were the first to volunteer to go down again at the risk of life itself.
The man who has turned round under shock and tried to get away from the front, I would not call him a coward. If it comes to be a question in this Debate of failure at a post which may be responsible for one, two or three hundred lives, I want to give this parallel of an explosion occurring in a British mine. In these cases there is no suggestion of giving the death penalty to those responsible for neglect. We heard a great deal about the great nerve of the miner and how they dug in against Jerry when he was doing his worst. These men are employed in an occupation in which they are constantly in contact with danger, but the effect upon the nervous system of various men is different.
But let us take some instances about boys who were shot. When the boatload of boys was sent to Antwerp there was no suggestion that because Winston Churchill failed he should receive the death penalty when he returned. Nothing was said in relation to that side of the question. If your logic were to be carried out what would it mean? I heard an hon. Member on the other side make the statement of men who lost their heads being shot. In civil life when a man loses his head we build asylums to put him in and if you are going to carry out the logic of the argument it would mean that instead of having asylums you would shoot every man who is declared to have lost; his control. I see some eminent medical Gentlemen on the other side and the hon. Member for the London University shakes his head. He ought to know better. My argument still holds good. If you take care as we have always done in war of the wounded man why not take care of the man who has been wounded in another way—wounds that do not come from the direct grip of the bayonet or the bullet
but received a shock. Why do you treat the man who is shell-shocked? Why not shoot him since he has failed to keep the brain together? You talk about the death penalty as being something that is going to make men fear leaving their posts. I know from my experience that that is absolutely futile. You do not instil courage into men by fear. You may keep the man there, through fear but you have not produced a courageous man by frightening him. The man who can be frightened is never courageous; he becomes a simple tool, for, the enemy. I know from practical experience that in places of great danger if, you started that kind of thing the whole of your company's working would instantly be swept away. I see that another hon. Gentleman shakes his head.

Captain BOWYER: I can give the Committee instances where that is not so.

Mr. HARDIE: I would like, to have my hon. Friend down in a coal mine. That would change his whole outlook so far as what he has misread under the term fear. When you are in a place where there are millions of tons between you and the sunlight it is quite a different thing from being in a place where there is always a chance. When you are like rats in a trap it becomes a different matter and a different outlook upon the mind. Even the sailor has always the chance of being picked up but in the coal mine there is no chance. When you come to the word courage I say this, that if instead of shooting a man you took that man and gave him time to settle down you would find that that man would become the most courageous. Hon. Members know that the mind does not always develop at the same time and in the same stages. There are some boys who have men's minds at 16 or 18, and there are some men at 60 who have boys' minds. If instead of shooting you gave men the necessary time to settle down for the mind to reflect on the conditions you would get a better type of man.

Sir S. HOARE: I think all hon. Members who have been present through the greater part of the Debate will agree with me that practically every side of the question has now been. covered, and certainly as far as my judgment goes it has been covered very effectively. I make an appeal to the Committee now to allow us
to take the Division and bring this discussion to an end.

Mr. THOMAS: The Committee will recollect, that we are debating practically five amendments and not one. We had agreed that, while we would divide on them individually, we would not debate them separately. What I suggest is that we will be quite loyal to the arrangement that was come to and that there will be no attempt to debate the separate amendments but I suggest it is too early yet to take the division. After all, we are dealing on a question of life and death, and it would be a great mistake and it would cause misunderstanding outside if at eight in the morning Members who wished to speak were denied the right of saying something on this subject.

Mr. EDE: The Financial Secretary to the War Office said that the Army Council and other authorities he consulted were unanimous that the death penalty must be retained if discipline was to be preserved, but 12 months ago the same story was told about Field Punishment, No. 1, and now we are told it can be safely abolished. The hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Hope Simpson) said that men showed cowardice in order to create a panic. I do not know if the hon. Member meant that, but anyone who had experience with the Forces overseas will not believe any man did that. Anyone who had experience of the War overseas knows that it was very difficult, a few moments before zero, to tell who was to be the coward and who was to be the bravest man in the regiment I remember being paraded at Rouen the first day I landed in France by a sergeant-major who had his breast ablaze with canteen medals. He surveyed us and gave us one order, which I am bound to say we performed very badly, and he said, "They spoiled an (adjectival) fine Army when they let you civilians join it." It was that attitude towards the voluntary soldiers of this country which was responsible for a great deal of the trouble in the Army. I have the greatest admiration for the old Army. The new Army would have been nothing without the N. C. O. 's who trained them, but there was in that new Army a spirit which the old Army could not possess. They enlisted for that particular war. If they had been faced less with the terror of the death penalty, but faced with the
possibility that they were going to fail, there would have been less trouble. If we are not going to carry this Amendment this year, I believe we will carry it next year. I believe we will be told next year that the discipline in the British Army is so fine that we can dispense with the death penalty.

8.0 A.M.

Mr. J. H. SIMPSON: If I used the words quoted by the hon. Member for Mitcham (Mr. Ede) it must have been the late hour of the night or the early hour of the morning that caused me to do so. With the greatest humility I hold in the highest admiration every man who fought for me in France. I did not fight in France myself. What I intended to convey was this: If a man through treachery caused a panic that man deserved death.

Captain BOWYER: I just want to make one point which has not been mentioned yet. It is this: All hon. Members who have been out in France will bear me out that the first thing that struck one coming out was the front line. There was a feeling which one never had before in the front line. The important thing from the point of view of the Army was to keep that front line. There came certain incidents one of which I have been trying not to recall, but which I feel it my duty to recall. In this incident to my mind you must have the death penalty. There came a time when owing to the awful terror that was instilled into the man who did his share of duty in the trenches time after time these men shot themselves in the foot or shot off their trigger finger. Why I interrupted the hon. Member for Spring-burn (Mr. Hardie) was that I understood his remedy was that if a man shot himself to escape one had to be pitiful and take him back to hospital. But what becomes of the line? The order was given out that if there were any more

cases of self-inflicted wounds the death penalty had to be imposed, not because any one of them deserved it, but because only thus could the line be saved.

Mr. BARKER: I think that the theory that punishment prevents cowardice is a delusion. It will be admitted by men who have been in the Army and who have been at war that men who commit crime are not deterred from recommitting crime by punishment. It was my terrible experience to see men flogged for various offences, but it turned out that some of them were not deterred by flogging, and repeated the crime for which they had been flogged. I should be ashamd to say I was a Britisher if I thought it necessary to have some superior form of terror over the minds of the soldiers before they did their duty. If the soldier is in good health it has a great deal to do with his conduct in the field. In 99 cases out of 100 he will do his duty. You will never get the coward to go to the front. He is a malingerer and a schemer and will find 120 ways of getting out of going to the front line. It is a psychological mistake to inflict the death penalty. It would be to the honour of this nation if we were to lead the way in Europe by the total abolition of capital punishment on military grounds. Capital punishment does not prevent criminal offences. Murder does not decrease by the number of scaffolds you erect. In the interests of the Army and of the honour and glory of this country we ought to abolish this penalty.

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Edward Wood): rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 173: Noes, 106.

Division No. 90.]
AYES.
[8.13 a.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Blades, Sir George Rowland
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Blundell, F. N.
Button, H. S.


Amery, Rt. Han. Leopold C. M. S.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cadogan, Major Edward


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Brass, Captain W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Lady-wood)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Bridge-man, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Clarry, Reginald George


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Briggs, Harold
Clayton. G. C.


Banks, Mitchell
Brittain, Sir Harry
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Brown, Major D, C. (Hex-ham)
Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale


Barns-ton, Major Harry
Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Cope. Major William


Becker. Harry
Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Court-hope, Lieut.-Col. George L.


Berry, Sir George
Bruton, Sir James
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)


Birchall, Major J. Dear-man
Buckley, Lieut. Colonel A.
Crook, C. W. (East Ham. North)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Ednam, Viscount
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Russell, William (Bolton)


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Lorimer, H. D.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Lloyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Falcon, Captain Michael
Lumley, L. R.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Falie. Major sir Bertram Godfray
McNeil!. Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Sandon, Lord


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Margesson, H. D. R.
Shepperson, E. W.


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Mercer, Colonel H.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Forestier-Walker. L.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Furness, G. J.
Moore-Brabazon. Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Stanley, Lord


Garland, C. S.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Steel, Major S. Strang


Goff. Sir R. Park
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Murchison, C. K.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Greene. Lt. Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Nail, Major Joseph
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Greenwood, William {Stockport)
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Sutcliffe, T.


Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Gwynne, Rupert S.
Nicholson, Brig-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hacking, captain Douglas H.
Nield. Sir Herbert
Titchfield. Marquess of


Halstead, Major D.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Tubbs, S. W.


Harrison, F. C.
Paget, T. G.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Harvey, Major S. E.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Waring, Major Walter


Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
Pease. William Edwin
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Wells, S. R.


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Penny, Frederick George
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Whl'e. Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Hiley, Sir Ernest
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Winterton, Earl


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Philipson, Hilton
Wise Frederick


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Pielou, D. P.
Wolmer, Viscount


Hohier, Gerald Fitzroy
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Privett. F. J.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Hood, Sir Joseph
Raine, W.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Hopkins. John W. W.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart



Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


Hudson, Capt. A.
Rentoul, G. S.



NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hayday, Arthur
Pringle, W. M. R.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Riley, Ben


Benn. Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Ritson, J.


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Herriotts, J.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Bonwick, A.
Hirst. G. H.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Bowdler, W. A.
Jenkins. W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Saklatvala, S.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Salter, Dr. A.


Bromfield. William
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Sexton, James


Brotherton, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham. Silvertown)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Buckle, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Burgess, S.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Simpson. J. Hope


Cairns, John
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sitch. Charles H.


Cape, Thomas
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford. East)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Snell, Harry


Darbishire. C. W.
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Davies. Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lansbury. George
Stephen. Campbell


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Leach, W.
Thomas. Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dunnico, H.
Linfield, F. C.
Turner, Ben


Ede James Chuter
M'Entee, V. L.
Warne. G. H.


Entwistle, Major C. F.
McLaren, Andrew
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Foot, Isaac
Maclean. Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Westwood J.


Gosling, Harry
Martin, F.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Wheatley, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Maxton, James
Whiteley, W.


Greenall, T.
Middleton, G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wilson, R. J. Jarrow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Newbold, J. T. W.
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Groves, T.
Oliver, George Harold
Wright, W.


Grundy, T. W.
Paling, W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Guest. S. (York, W.B., Hemsworth)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Phillipps. Vivian
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.
Mr Ammon and Mr. Lunn.


Hardle, George D.

Question put accordingly, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 103; Noes, 175.

Division No.91.]
AYES.
[8.21 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hiilsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Phillipps, Vivian


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abortillery)
Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Batey, Joseph
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Pringle, W. M. R.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Riley, Ben


Bonwick, A.
Herriotts, J.
Ritson, J.


Bowdler, W. A.
Hirst, G. H.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Broad, F. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Bromfield, William
John, William (Rhonada, West)
Saklatvala, S.


Brotherton, J.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Salter, Dr. A.


Buchanan, G.
Johnstone, Harcourt (willesden, East)
Sexton, James


Buckle, J.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Burgess, S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Cairns, John
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Charleton, H. C.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Snell, Harry


Darbishire, C. W.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kirkwood, D.
Stephen, Campbell


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lansbury, George
Stewart, Gershom (Wirral)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Dunnico, H.
Leach, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Ede, James Chuter
Lee, F.
Turner, Ben


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Linfield, F. C.
Warne, G. H.


Foot, Isaac
M'Entee, V. L.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gosling, Harry
McLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wheatley, J.


Greenall, T.
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Whtteley, W.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell. D. R. (Glamorgan)
Middleton, G.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Groves, T,
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Grundy, T. W.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Wright, W.


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hall, F. (York. W. H., Normanton)
Paling, W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Mr. Lunn and Mr. Ammon.


NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Hogg. Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy


Amery, Rt. Han. Leopold C. M. S.
Curzon. Captain viscount
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Davidson, J.C.C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Hood, Sir Joseph


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Davies. Thomas (Cirencester)
Hopkins, John W. W.


Astor J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Dawson, Sir Philip
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Doyle, N. Crattan
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hudson, Capt. A.


Banks, Mitchell
Du Pre. Colonel William Baring
Hutchison. G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Inskip. Sir Thomas Walker H.


Barnston, Major Harry
Ednam, Viscount
Jarrett, G. W. S.


Becker, Harry
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Berry, Sir George
Erskine. Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Erskine-Bolst. Captain C.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Blades. Sir George Rowland
Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Blundell, F. N.
Falcon, Captain Michael
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.


Bowyer. Capt. G. E. W.
Falle. Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Lloyd. Cyril E. (Dudley)


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Fawkes, Major F. H
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Brass, Captain W.
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Lorimer, H. D.


Brassey Sir Leonard
Forestier-Walker, L.
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Foxcroft. Captain Charles Talbot
Lumley, L. R.


Briggs. Harold
Furness, G. J.
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Garland, C. S.
Margesson, H. D. R.


Brown, Major D. C (Hexham)
Goff. Sir R. Park
Mercer, Colonel H.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Greene. Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.


Bruton, Sir James
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C


Buckley, Lieut. Colonel A.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Moreing. Captain Algernon H.


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)


Button, H. S.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Murchison, C. K.


Cadogan, Major Edward
Halstead, Major D.
Nail, Major Joseph


Canpion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Hannon. Patrick Joseph Henry
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)


Cayzer, Sir C (Chester, City)
Harrison, F. C.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)


Chamberlain. Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Harvey, Major S. E.
Nield. Sir Herbert


Clarry, Reginald George
Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)
O'Neill. Rt. Hon. Hugh


Clayton, G. C.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Colfox. Major Win. Phillips
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Paget, T. G.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Parker, Owen (Kettering)


Cope, Major William
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Pease, William Edwin


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque


Penny, Frederick George
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney
Titchfield, Marquess of


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Tubbs. S. W.


Philipson, Hilton
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Pielou, D. P.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.
Waring, Major Walter


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Sandon, Lord
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Privett, F. J.
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)
wells, S. R


Raine, W.
Shepperson, E. W.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Simpson, J. Hope
White, Col. G. D. (Southport)


Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)
Winterton, Earl


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wise, Frederick


Rentoul, G. S.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.
Wolmer, Viscount


Reynolds, W. G. W.
Stanley, lord
wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
Steel, Major S. Strang
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-



Roundell, Colonel R. F.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ruggles-Brise, Major E.
Sutcliffe, T.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)



Russell, William (Bolton)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)

Mr. W. GREENWOOD: As a private Member and in view of the fact that the House was adjourned on Thursday before six o'clock and again finally adjourned at 7 o'clock and has been sitting all the,time since and that a great many Of my constituents are interested in a private Bill coming on Friday—is it possible for both sides of the House to accelerate business so that we may get on.

Mr. THOMAS: I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
I think the appeal of the hon. Member is one that has been made by the Opposition. I was not aware of the tremendous difficulty many of the supporters of the Government were in. I understand that the Government have made arrangements, especially with the Lancashire Members, that an opportunity would he given them to express the difficulties under which the cotton trade is labouring at this moment. Obviously there will be differences of opinion on the merits of the matter that should come on this afternoon, [An HON. MEMBER "Why are you blocking it?"] I now rise to give an opportunity to the Government of helping them. There is only one way in which it can be done and that if: to accede to the Motion to report Progress.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I am sure the right hon. Gentleman realises that there arc other ways of meeting the wishes of my hon. Friend than the one he has just

suggested. I venture to think it would be quite possible to get this Bill without. reporting Progress and finish the business we hope to get and still leave time for the House to sit at the ordinary Friday sitting. We have had on the whole a very friendly discussion. I cannot accept the Motion to report Progress.

Mr. THOMAS: I obviously would not have made this Motion but for the very legitimate request made) by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. W. Greenwood). I am sorry that my right hon. Friend cannot accede to the very reasonable request. I made, and there is no alternative but to go on with the business.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: There is one point which I think the Government is overlooking, and that is that this is the second occasion this week that the Government has filched away private Members' days. There was to have been an important discussion on the Carlisle experiment on Wednesday night, which, owing to various matters with which I need not charge the Government afresh, was lost to the House. Now there is the Cotton Bill, and to show that I am perfectly impartial I have a Motion down for the rejection of the Bill. I am standing up for the rights of private Members.

Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 107 Noes, 172.

Division No 92.]
AYES.
[8.40 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Berkeley. Captain Reginald
Brotherton, J


Ammon, Charles George
Bonwick, A.
Buchanan, G


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Bowdler, W. A.
Buckle. J.


Batey, Joseph
Broad, F. A.
Burgess, S.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Bromfield, William
Cairns, John


Cape, Thomas
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Roberts, Frederick 0. (W. Bromwich)


Charloton, H. C.
Junes, J. J. (West Ham. Silvertown)
Saklatvala, S.


Darbishire, C. W.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Salter, Dr. A.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sexton, James


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Shinwell, Emanuel


Duff, T. Gavan
Kirkwood, D.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dunnico, H.
Lansbury, George
Simpson, J. Hope


Ede, James Chunter
Lawson, John James
Sitch, Charles H.


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Leach, W.
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Foot. Isaac
Lee, F.
Snell, Harry


Gosling, Harry
Linfield, F C.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Lunn, William
Stephen, Campbell


Greenall, T.
MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
M'Entee, V. L.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
McLaren, Andrew
Thome, W. (West Ham, Plaistpw)


Griffiths. T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Turner, Ben


Groves, T.
Martin, F.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Warne, G. H.


Grundy, T. W.
Maxton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Middleton, G.
Westwood J.


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wheatley, J.


Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Whiteley. W.


Hardie, George D.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Va1l"y)


Hayday, Arthur
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercliffe)


Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Paling, W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Phillipps. Vivian
Wright, W.


Herriotts, J.
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hirst, G. H.
Pringle, W. M. R.



Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Riley, Ben
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colons Gibbs.


Johnston. Thomas (Stirling)
Ritson, J.



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Margesson, H. D. R.


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Erskine. Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Mercer, Colonel H.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Eyres-Monsell. Com. Bolton M.
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Falcon, Captain Michael
Moore-Brabazon. Lieut. Col. J. T. C.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Codfray
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Fawkes, Major F. H.
Morrison-Sell, Major A. C. (Honiton)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Murchison. C. K.


Banks, Mitchell
Forestier-Walker, L.
Nail, Major Joseph


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Newman. Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)


Barnston, Major Harry
Furness, G. J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Becker, Harry
Garland, C. S.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)


Berry, Sir George
Goff, Sir R. Park
Nield. Sir Herbert


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh


Blades. Sir George Rowland
Greene. Lt.-Col. Sir w. (Hack'y, N.)
Ormsby-Gore. Hon. William


Blundell, F. N.
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Paget, T. G.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E, W.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)


Boyd-Carpenter. Major A.
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Pease, William Edwin


Brass, Captain W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Halstead, Major D.
Penny, Frederick George


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Briggs, Harold
Harrison, F. C.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harvey, Major S. E.
Philipson, Hilton


Brown, Major D. C (Hexham)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Pielou, D. P.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Privett, F. J.


Bruton, Sir James
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Raine, W.


Buckley. Lieut.-Colonel A.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Button, H. S.
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Cadogan, Major Edward
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Rentoul, G. S.


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Hood, Sir Joseph
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hopkins. John W. W.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford. Hereford)


Clarry, Reginald George
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Clayton, G. C.
Hudson, Capt. A.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips.
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Rugnles-Brise, Major E.


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cope, Major William
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Russell, William (Bolton)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Crook, C. W (East Ham, North)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth. Putney)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Davidson, J. C. C.(Hemel Hempstead)
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Sanderson, sir Frank B.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Lloyd. Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sandon, Lord


Dawson, Sir Philip
Lloyd-Greame. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Shepperson, E. W.


Doyle, N. Grattan
Lorimer, H. D,
Smith. Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Du Pre. Colonel William Baring
Loyd. Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Edmondson Major A. J.
Lumley, L. R.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Ednam, Viscount
McNeill, Ronald (Kent. Canterbury)
Stanley, Lord




Steel, Major S. Strang
Tubbs, S. W.
Wolmer, Viscount


Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.
Turton, Edmund Russborough
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-
Waring, Major Walter
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Wellington)
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Sutcliffe, T.
Wells. S. R.



Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)
Wheler, Col Granville C. H.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)
Mr. Morgan Jones and Mr. John Robertson.


Titchfield. Marquess of
Winterton. Earl



Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Wise, Frederick

New CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section. 6.)

"In section six for the words 'be liable to suffer death, or such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned,' there shall be substituted 'be liable to be kept in penal servitude for life, or any shorter period (not less than three years), or to such less punish-

ment as is in this Act mentioned."—[Mr. Luwson.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 104: Noes, 173.

Division No. 93.]
AYES
[8.50 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Phillipps, Vivian


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Pringle, W. M. R.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Riley, Ben


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Herriotts, J.
Ritson, J.


Bonwick, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Bowdler, W. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Saklatvala, S.


Broad, F. A.
John. William (Rhondda. West)
Salter, Dr. A.


Bromfield, William
Johnston. Thomas (Stirling)
Sexton, James


Brotherton, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury}


Buckle, J.
Jones, R. T, (Carnarvon)
Sitch, Charles H.


Burgess, S.
Jones, T. 1. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Cairns, John
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Snell, Harry


Cape, Thomas
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Charleton, H. C.
Kirkwood, D.
Stephen, Campbell


Darbishire, C. W.
Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Leach, w.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lee, F.
Turner, Ben


Dunnico, H.
Linfield, F. C.
Warne, G. H.


Ede, James Chuter
Lunn, William
Watts-Morgan. LI.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Entwistle, Major C. F.
MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)
Westwood, J.


Foot, Isaac
M'Entee, V. L.
Wheatley, J.


Gosling, Harry
McLaren, Andrew
Whiteley, W.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenall, T.
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercllffe)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Grenfell. D. R. (Glamorgan)
Middleton, G.
Wood. Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wright, W.


Groves, T.
Murray, R. (Renfrew. Western)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Grundy, T. W.
Newbold, J. T. W.



Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Mr. John Robertson and Mr. Morgan Jones.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Briggs, Harold
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Brittain, Sir Harry
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Dawson, Sir Philip


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Doyle, N. Grattan


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Bruton, Sir James
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Du Pre. Colonel William Baring


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Button, H. S.
Ednam, Viscount


Banks, Mitchell
Cadogan, Major Edward
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)


Barnston, Major Harry
Cayzer. Sir C. (Chester, City)
Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.


Becker, Harry
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Eyres-Monsell. Com. Bolton M.


Berry, Sir George
Clarry. Reginald George
Falcon, Captain Michael


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Clayton, G. C.
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Fawkes, Major F. H.


Blundell, F. N.
Colvin, Brig. General Richard Beale
Ford, Patrick Johnston


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cope. Major William
Forestier-Walk"r, L.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Courthope. Lieut.-Col. George L.
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot


Brass, Captain W.
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Furness, G. J.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Garland, C. S.


Bridgeman. Rt. Hon. William Clive
Curzon, Captain viscount
Goff, Sir R. Park


Gray. Harold (Cambridge)
Mercer, Colonel H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Greene. Lt.-Col. Sir w. (Hack'y, N.)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth. futney)


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Guiness, Lieut. Col. Hon. W. E.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut. Col. J. T. C.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Gwynne, Rupert S.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Sandon, Lord


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Halstead. Major D.
Murchison, C. K.
Shepperson, E. W.


Harrison, Patrick Joseph Henry
Nail, Major Joseph
Simpson, J. Hope


Harrison, F. C.
Newman. Colonel J. R. P. {Finchley
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Harvey. Major S. E.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Nield, Sir Herbert
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Stanley, Lord


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Steel, Major S. Strang


Hiley, Sir Ernest
Paget, T. G.
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Pease, William Edwin
Sueter Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Sutcliffe, T.


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Penny, Frederick George
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Hood, Sir Joseph
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen. S.)


Hopkins, John W. W.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Philipson, Hilton
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Pielou, D. P.
Tubbs, S. W.


Hudson, Capt A
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Privett, F. J.
Waring, Major Walter


Inskip. Sir Thomas Walker H.
Raine, W.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Jarrett, G. W. S.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Wells, S. R.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
White. Col. G D. (Southport)


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Rentoul, G. S.
Winterton, Earl


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Reynolds, W. G. W.
Wise, Frederick


Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
Wolmer, Viscount


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon.)


Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. sir Philip
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Lorimer, H. D.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Ruggles-Brlse, Major E.



Lumley, L. R.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Russell, William (Bolton)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colons Gibbs.


Margesson, K. D. R.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney

9.0 A.M.

Mr. THOMAS: I have just discovered that- a very serious incident has occurred, and I am sure all parts of the House will assist to remedy it. I have been informed that one of my hon. Friends, the Member for Pontypridd (Mr. Mardy Jones) has been taken advantage of, because of his stature. Unfortunately he walked into the wrong lobby, and I understand that he. was prevented from escaping. I do not suggest that it was done deliberately. If he had been like other hon. Members near me, he would have been able to defend himself, but owing to the fact that he was unable to defend himself, and also owing to the fact that he is a Welshman, I merely ask that the proper steps should be taken to see that Members are given an opportunity of exercising their rights and privileges.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I did not quite understand from the right hon. Gentleman whether the hon. Member for Pontypridd had missed an opportunity for recording his vote. My impression is that he did not. I did my best to secure that his exit should be possible, and that he got into the lobby to which he intended to go, but from which he had wandered by some error. If he did not get there in time to record his vote, I do not know
that it would be possible for his vote to be recorded.

Mr. THOMAS: The right hon. Gentleman has done what we all expected. In substance he has said that if an error was made, he will do his best to rectify it. Unfortunately, the last occasion on which I saw the hon. Member for Pontypridd he was in the company of the Home Secretary.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): I understand that the hon. Member ultimately voted in the way he wanted to vote, so all is well.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section 7.)

In Section seven of the Army Act, for the words "shall on conviction by court-martial be liable to suffer death or such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned," there shall be substituted the words "shall on conviction by court-martial be liable to be kept in penal servitude for life or any shorter period (not less than throe years). or to such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned."—(Mr. Lawson.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. LAWSON: I beg to move, "That the Clause he read a Second time."
Most Members understand that we made an arrangement last night. that we would not debate these particular
Clauses, but take the discussion on one Clause in order to save time. I, therefore, simply formally beg to move this Clause.

Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 103; Noes, 177.

Division No. 94.]
AYES.
[9.7 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro")
Hardie, George D.
Phillipps, Vivian


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Pringle, W. M. R.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, T, (Glasgow)
Riley, Ben


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Herriotts, J.
Ritson, J.


Bonwick, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Bowdler, W. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Saklatvala, S.


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Salter, Dr. A.


Brotherton, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Sexton. James


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Buckle, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Burgess, S.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cairns, John
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Cape, Thomas
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Snell, Harry


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Darbishire, C. W.
Kirkwood, O.
Steven, Campbell


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Leach, W.
Thome, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dunnico, H.
Lee, F.
Turner, Ben


Ede, James Chuter
Linfield, F. C.
Warne, G. H.


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Mac Donald, J. R. (Aberavon)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Foot, Isaac
M'Entee, V. L.
Westwood J.


Gosling, Harry
McLaren, Andrew
Wheatley, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Whiteley, W.


Greenall, T.
Martin, F.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Middleton, G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Groves, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Grundy, T. W.
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wright, W.


Guest, J. (York, W.H., Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hall, F. (York W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Mr. Lunn and Mr. T. Griffiths.


NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Harrison, F. C.


Alexander, Col M. (Southwark)
Cope, Major William
Harvey, Major S. E.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Archer.Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Craig, Capt. C. C. (Antrim, South)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)


Astor, J. J, (Kent, Dover)
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
Hiley, Sir Ernest


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Banks, Mitchell
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Doyle, N. Gratian
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy


Becker, Harry
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Bellairs, Commander Cartyon W.
Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Hood, Sir Joseph


Berry, Sir George
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hopkins, John W. W.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Ednam, Viscount
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Elliot, Capt. Waller E. (Lanark)
Howard-Bury, Lieut. Col. C. K.


Blundell, F. N.
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Hudson, Capt. A.


Bowyer. Capt. G. E. W
Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)


Boyd Carpenter, Major A.
Evres Monsell, Cam. Bolton M.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brass, Captain W.
Falcon, Captain Michael
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Jarrett, G. W. S-


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Fawkes, Major F. H.
Keiley, Major Fred (Rotherham)


Briggs, Harold
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Brittain, Sir Harry
Forestier-Walker, L.
Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough. E.)
Furness, G. J.
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Bruton, Sir James
Garland, C. S.
Lorimer, H. O.


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Goff. Sir R. Park
Lumley, L. R.


Button, H. S.
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)


Cadogah, Major Edward
Greene, Lt.Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Maddocks, Henry


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Margesson, H. O. R.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Mercer, Colonel H.


Chamberlain. Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw


Glarry, Reginald George
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.


Clayton, G. C.
Halstead, Major D.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.


Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honlton)
Rentoul, G. S.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Murchison, C. K.
Reynolds, W. G. W.
Sueter, Hear Admiral Murray Fraser


Nail, Major Joseph
Richardson, Lt.-Col. sir P. (Chertsey)
Sutcliffe, T.


Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henlay)


Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Nield, Sir Herbert
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Tubbs, S. W.


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Russell, William (Bolton)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Paget, T. G.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney
Waring, Major Walter


Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Pease, William Edwin
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Wells, S. R.


Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Penny, Frederick George
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.
White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Sandon, Lord
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Leslie O. (P'tsm'th, S.)


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)
Winterton, Earl


Philipson, Hilton
Shepperson, E. W.
Wise, Frederick


Pleiou, D. P.
Simpson, J. Hope
Wolmer, Viscount


Pownall, Lieut.-Golonel Assheton
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)
Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Privett, F. J.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Rains, W.
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Stanley, Lord



Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Steel, Major S. Strang
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Reid, Capt. A. S, C. (Warrington)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.
Major Barston and Capt. Douglas King.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Amendment of Section 12.)

In Section twelve of the Army Act, for the words "be liable to suffer death, or such less punishment as is in this Act mentioned," there shall be substituted the words "be liable to be kept in penal servitude for life or any shorter period (not less than three years), or to such less punish-

ment as is in this Act mentioned."—[Mr. Lawson.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 105; Noes, 180.

Division No. 95.]
AYES.
[9.16 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Phillipps, Vivian


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Pringle, W. M. R.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Riley, Ben


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Herriotts, J.
Ritson, J.


Bonwick, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Bowdler, W. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Saklatvala, S.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Salter, Dr. A.


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Sexton, James


Brotherton, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Buckle, J.
Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)
Sitch, Charles H.


Burgess, S.
Jones, T. J. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Cairns, John
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Snell, Harry


Cape, Thomas
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Charleton, H. C.
Kirkwood, D.
Stephen, Campbell


Darbishire, C. W.
Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawson, John James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Leach, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lee, F.
Turner, Ben


Dunnico, H.
Linfield, F. C.
Warne, G. H.


Edo, James Chuter
Lunn, William
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Entwistle, Major C. F.
Mac Donald, J. H. (Aberavon)
Webb, Sidney


Foot, Isaac
M'Entee, V. L.
Westwood, J.


Gosling, Harry
McLaren, Andrew
Wheatley, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford) '
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Whiteley, W.


Greenall, T.
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Middleton, G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Groves, T.
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wright, W.


Grundy, T. W.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold



Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES—


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Mr. John Robertson and Mr. Morgan Jones.


NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)


Amery, Rt. Hon Leopold C. M. S.
Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Banks, Mitchell


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hackn'y, N.)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Becker, Harry
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Philipson, Hilton


Bellairs, Commander Cariyon W.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Pielou, D. P.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Berry, Sir George
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Privett, F. J.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Halstead, Major D.
Ratne, W.


Blundell, F. N.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Harrison, F. C.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Harvey, Major S. E.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Brass, Captain W.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hennessy, Major J. R. G,
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Briggs, Harold
Herbert. Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Bruton, Sir James
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Russell, William (Bolton)


Sutler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Button, H. S.
Hopkins, John W. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cadogan, Major Edward
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W, H.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Cassels, J. D.
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Sandon, Lord


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Clarry, Reginald George
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Shepperson, E. W.


Clayton, G. C.
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Simpson, J. Hope


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cope, Major William
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stanley, Lord


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South).
Lorimer, H. D.
Steel, Major S. Strang


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Lumley, L. R.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Maddocks. Henry
Sutcliffe, T.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Margesson, H. D. R.
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Mercer, Colonel H.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Titchfield, Marquess of


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Tubbs, S. W.


Ednam, Viscount
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honlton)
Waring, Major Walter


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Murchison, C. K.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Nail, Major Joseph
Wells, S. R.


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Falcon, Captain Michael
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
White, Col. G. D. (Southport)


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Leslie O. (P'tsm'th, S.)


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Nield, Sir Herbert
Winterton, Earl


Ford, Patrick Johnston
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Wise, Frederick


Forestier-Walker, L.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Wolmer, Viscount


Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Paget, T. G.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Furness, G. J.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Garland, C. S.
Pease, William Edwin
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Gibbs, Colonel George Abraham
Pennefather, De Fonblanque



Goff, Sir R. Park
Penny, Frederick George
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Major Barnston and Captain Douglas King.

Mr. THOMAS: I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
I think it will be generally agreed that we have carried out our bargain Having carried out our side of the bargain, and since a large number of Members have come into the Committee and are not aware of the strong feeling that exists among Lancashire Members to enable them to raise their Lancashire grievances in the cotton industry, I wonder whether the Home Secretary will reconsider the decision that I know was given hastily and without due regard to all the facts.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: The argument which I used a very short time ago to
a similar Motion by the same right hon. Gentleman is even more applicable now.

Mr. THOMAS: I am extremely sorry. I will be content with showing my feelings by going into the Division Lobby.

Mr. PRINGLE: I am delighted that upon this occasion I shall have the opportunity of making a few observations. The right hon. Gentleman has moved to report Progress. I had intended to support the Government when a previous Motion was made, my reason being that the hour at which the Motion was made was 3 o'clock, a time at which the trains were not running for Members to go home. But the situation is now changed. The sun is now high in the heavens.

Sir HARRY BRITTAIN: I wish you were!

Mr. PRINGLE: I hope the Home Secretary will not keep us here indefinitely as he is keeping the interned in Ireland. I am concerned, like the Members who represent Lancashire constituencies, in a Bill which is to be dealt with at the sitting of the House to-day. A continuance of this sitting would prejudice a sitting of high Imperial importance. I use both adjectives advisedly, because we all know the peril in which the cotton industry stands; we know the possibility of rescuing it, and we can only have that Measure if the House sits to-day at the usual time. I know the President of the Board of Trade is in the precincts of the House, and I understand the Government are ready to give facilities to the Bill if it passes its Second Reading at this day's sitting. In these circumstances, I can make this appeal without any suggestion on the part of any one in the House that I have been in any way contributing to the undue prolongation of the proceedings. It is always wise, when a Government is in the heyday of its power, when it has unbroken legions at its command, to show a reasonable, moderate and conciliatory spirit to an Opposition no matter how insignificant it may be. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw"] I am sorry if my hon. Friends on these Benches think I am applying the term to them. They are anything but a weak Opposition; they are too aggressive. I merely quote this as a warning to the Government. If these things be done in the green tree what will be done in the dry? [An HON. MEMBER "You are up a gum tree!"] I am sure these things appeal to the Patronage Secretary, who I am sorry to say, has just gone out of the House, but I wish to say a few words of sympathy to his genial deputy. We all appreciate the hard and toilsome road of a Whip in ordinary times but when a misadventure occurs and he is exposed to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune then it is that the sympathetic heart goes out to him. I have been doing all I could to help him and his colleagues since that deplorable incident and I think he and his colleagues might make some recognition of that. We do not want to divide. We have had enough of it. Even the greatest glutton for divisions must be satisfied. We want to get away now.
My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing (Sir H. Nield), who comes in with his shining morning face, will be with me in that. We like his associations intermittent though they be.

The CHAIRMAN: I think there is no connection between the hon. and learned Member for Ealing and the Motion to report Progress.

Mr. PRINGLE: I had not just reached that point. I feel that in view of my hon. and learned Friend's recent record, he might help us in the Lobby. There are not so many others to whom that appeal could be made. I also thought Lancashire might be with us, but Lancashire has deserted.

Mr. W. GREENWOOD: Lancashire knows its friends.

Mr. PRINGLE: There are also Members in the shade. As the sun has now responded to my appeal, surely the Government will do likewise and respond to the influences of nature Let it be to them an omen of the line they should take at the present time. It is a great opportunity. The House can now rise from its labours in the cheeriest and happiest frame of mind, conscious of a night of hard work well done, long discussion reasonably and moderately maintained, decisions carefully taken and labours performed in the same spirit and in such a way as to bring the utmost gratification and satisfaction to the Government.

Captain BERKELEY: I have no intention of saying anything provocative. I just want to urge this view on the Government. There are still to my knowledge two really important Amendments to this Bill. There is one in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) which raises a very important issue connected with the propriety of Field General Courts-Martial. There is really a great amount of ground to be covered on both questions, to say nothing of the point which is being put by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) in connection with the Schedule to the Bill. If this matter is to be properly debated, and if we are to get, as I hope we shall, a fruitful result, I earnestly urge upon the Government that they should see their way to adopt this
Motion of my right hon. Friend and report Progress now and resume the sitting and discussion of this Act at the earliest possible occasion.

Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 111; Noes, 193.

Division No. 96.]
AYES.
[9.50 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Harbord, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Ammon, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Pringle, W. M. R.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Batey, Joseph
Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Ritson, J.


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)


Bonwick, A.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (York, Elland)


Bowdler, W. A.
Herriotts, J.
Saklatvala, S.


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. A.


Bromfield, William
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Sexton, James


Brothorton, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Buckle, J.
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Burgess, S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Simpson, J. Hope


Cairns, John
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cape, Thomas
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Snell, Harry


Darbishire, C. W.
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Dudgeon. Major C. R.
Leach, W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duffy, T. Gavan
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dunnico, H.
Linfield, F. C.
Turner, Ben


Ede, James Chuter
Lunn, William
Warne, G. H.


Entwistle, Major C. F.
MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Fairbairn, R. R.
M'Entee, V. L.
Webb, Sidney


Foot, Isaac
McLaren, Andrew
Westwood J.


Gosling, Harry
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wheatley, J.


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)
Whiteley, W.


Greenall, T,
Maxton, James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Middleton, G.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Groves, T.
Newbold, J. T. W.
Wright, W.


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Guest, J. (York, W.R., Hemsworth)
Paling, W.



Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Phillipps, Vivian
Mr. John Robertson and Mr. Morgan Jones.


NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Ford, Patrick Johnston


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Button, H. S.
Forestier Walker, L.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Cadogan, Major Edward
Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot


Archar-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Furness, G. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Cassels, J. D.
Garland, C. S.


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Goff, Sir R. Park


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Gould, James C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)


Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.
Clarry, Reginald George
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)


Banks, Mitchell
Clayton, G. C.
Greenwood, William (Stockport)


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.


Barnston, Major Harry
Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Gwynne, Rupert S.


Becker, Harry
Cope, Major William
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Craig, Capt. C. C. (Antrim, South)
Halstead, Major D.


Berry, Sir George
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harrison, F. C.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Daizlel, Sir D. (Lambeth, Brixton)
Harvey, Major S. E.


Blundell, F. N.
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hampstead)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)


Brass, Captain W.
Doyle, N. Grattan
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Hiley, Sir Ernest


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hoare, Lt -Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Brings, Harold
Ednam, Viscount
Hogg. Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Hood, Sir Joseph


Bruford, R.
Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Hopkins, John W. W.


Bruton, Sir James
Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Falcon, Captain Michael
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Fawkes, Major F. H.
Hudson, Capt. A.


Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Shepperson, E. W.


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Pease, William Edwin
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Jarrett, G. W. S.
Penny, Frederick George
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Stanley, Lord


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Steel, Major S. Strang


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Perring, William George
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Law, Rt. Hon. A. B. (Glasgow, C.)
Philipson, Hilton
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Pielou, D. P.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray
Sutcliffe, T.


Lorimer, H. O.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Preston, Sir W. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South]


Lumley, L. R.
Privett, F. J.
Titchfield, Marquess of


McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Raine, W.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Maddocks, Henry
Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Tubbs, S. W.


Manville, Edward
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Waring, Major Walter


Margesson, H. D. R.
Rawson Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Mercer, Colonel H.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Wells, S. R.


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Rentoul, G. S.
Weston, Colonel John Wakefield


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Reynolds, W. G. W.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Molson, Major John Elsdale
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)


Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford. Hereford)
Winterton, Earl


Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. Sir S. (Ecclesall)
Wise, Frederick


Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honlton)
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W)
Wolmer, Viscount


Murchison, C. K,
Roundell, Colonel R. F.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Edward F. L. (Ripon)


Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.
Wood, Major Sir S. Hill-(High Peak)


Newman, sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Russell, William (Bolton)
Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward


Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Russell-Welts, Sir Sydney
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)



Nield, Sir Herbert
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES —


O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.



Paget, T. G.
Sandon, Lord

NEW CLAUSE.—(Courts-Martial right of appeal.)

Notwithstanding any provision of the Army Act any member of His Majesty's forces sentenced to death by court-martial shall have the right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal assisted by one or more military assessors as the Lord Chancellor may direct.—[Mr. Lansbury.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

10.0 A.M.

Mr. LANSBURY: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
We have had a very long discussion on the question of punishments, and especially on the question of the death penalty. I think everything I have heard to-night has confirmed me in my view that, no matter how we may draft the Regulations, the real thing that is wrong is war, and until we can get rid of the spirit of war there will always be the kind of things we have heard about this morning, which everyone deplores. What amazes me is that in the year 1923 we are obliged to sit calmly by and hear and discuss this question, which is really murder and nothing else, and we are told that in order to secure wholesale Murder we must retain the right to individual murder. I hope some day this House will sit down to a full discussion of the whole question of war, not merely the abolition of capital punishment, but
what means we can take to bring about the abolition of war. If I were a father or mother in Iraq, I would be unable to understand why a Christian nation should send out aeroplanes to bomb me and my children—

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Sir F. Banbury): Order, order!

Mr. LANSBURY: You must not shout at me. Order yourself! I am not going to be bullied, and am not going to be shouted at by you.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order. The hon. Member must not challenge the decisions of the Chair.

Mr. LANSBURY: I shall challenge you when you bully me.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: It is not in order to discuss what is going on in Iraq.

Mr. LANSBURY: I do not know what to call you—Mr. Chairman or Mr. Deputy-Chairman? I shall call you Sir Frederick Banbury: We have had a long discussion, and it has been one of the best Debates I have listened to. I am not going to be a party to breaking up the spirit which has animated this Committee to-night. I ought to explain that the discussion, to which you have not had the privilege of listening, has been
concerned with capital punishment for men who fail in time of war. Incidentally I wished to say that, although I am a pacifist and bate war, I do not wish the Air Minister to think I challenge him—I feel he, personally, is not a bad man.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: That may be all right, but it has nothing to do with the Question before the Committee. I would ask the hon. Member to confine his remarks to the Amendment.

Mr. LANSBURY: Certainly, I am doing so. We shall not get rid of these cases until we get rid of war.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must confine his remarks to the right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Mr. LANSBURY: Everyone knows a Court of Criminal Appeal was set up in this country because there was uneasiness in the minds of the public that some persons were probably sentenced to death whose cases should be considered by such a court I know that a soldier can appeal from one officer to another, but he does not get the chance to come before a court. We have failed to secure the abolition of the death penalty and we want to get this in the hope that it will finally lead to the abolition of the death penalty, and we want to give the soldier or officer the same privileges as those granted to the civilian found guilty of murder and sentenced to be hung. I hope we will not have this dismissed simply as something new and therefore dangerous, although it is something new to bring a soldier before a civil court.

Sir S. HOARE: We have had a very good-natured Debate, on the whole, during this rather long Sitting. I hope the Committee will therefore excuse me if my answer to the hon. Member is somewhat short. The hon. Member asked me to give this Amendment careful consideration. I can assure him I have given it a lot of careful thought. I do not in the least object to it because it is something new, but I object to it because I really believe the soldier and officer would be worse off in matters of appeal than at present. The officer and the soldier or airman have at present a variety of safeguards. First, they have the review of the confirming officer of the Court Martial.
Then the sentence has again to be reviewed by the Judge Advocate-General, who, as the Committee knows, is a lawyer and not a soldier. Thirdly, the officer or man has the right to send a petition to the Sovereign through the Secretary of State. These three safeguards are very real ones. Moreover the Secretary of State can look at the case not from the strict point of view of the letter of the law—he can quash sentences on general grounds. I think the Committee will agree that all these safeguards are very real ones. If for these safeguards they substituted a Court of Criminal Appeal what is going to happen? Take first of all the case of a Court Martial and the sentence of death upon active service. I suggest to the Committee that it would be quite impossible to adopt the machinery of the Court of Criminal Appeal. It would mean first of all that an inquiry would have to be held on the spot. It would then mean that the papers with reference to the case would have to be sent to London. It would then mean that the officer or the man charged would also have to be sent back to London and it would probably mean several months before the case could come before the Court of Criminal Appeal at all. I suggest to the Committee that such a procedure would be quite impracticable during active service. If that be so, take the other alternative of peace time. There, I suggest, that no such safeguard is necessary for the very good reason that death sentences for example within the United Kingdom are practically unknown in peace time. Not even during the War was there a single death sentence within the United Kingdom, and within peace times within the memory of man there has not been a case of a death sentence by Court Martial in the United Kingdom. What I understand does happen is that in the event of a serious charge the case is almost invariably taken into a civil court. I hope I have said enough to the Committee that upon active service the procedure would be quite impracticable, whereas in peace time it is not needed at all. I hope, therefore, that with this short explanation the Committee will agree with me in rejecting the Clause.

Mr. R. DAVIES: The Committee were told just now that a soldier sentenced to death has three appeals after the Court
Martial and one of the appeals and the final one apparently was to the Sovereign. But that appeal comes in the first place to the Minister of State, and so far as my knowledge of these cases goes it works out in this way, that when the man appeals to the Minister of State it is the duty of the Minister to recommend to the Sovereign the attitude of the Sovereign towards that man, and I have yet to learn that in any single case the Sovereign would intervene and upset the recommendation of the Home Secretary in such a case of capital punishment. I just want to make two observations on the Amendment. I think the Amendment has a great deal of substance in it. The object of our Amendment is this, that we shall give a man who has been tried for his life, who has been condemned to death, that he shall have a chance of being tried by judicial tribunal without that suspicion and bias and prejudice that must arise in connection with these people who have tried it on the battlefield or thereabouts. Let me point this out to the Committee. What seems strange to us is this. Let me try to draw a picture of the case of a young man 19 years of age in the Army. He has failed in his duty as a soldier. That young man is sentenced to death and the sentence of death is carried out without the appeal that would apply, for insance, to a hardened criminal in civilian clothes. Take the other side. Here you have in this country in civilian clothes a criminal hardened to the job. He will go through the whole process of the law of the land, expense is incurred in connection with his case, and he goes right up to the Court of Criminal Appeal and is given every advantage that the law allows. But this young lad, 19 years of age, is brought up before a court martial, sentenced to death, and his sentence is carried out. One last observation I wish to make. A man in soldier's clothes is sentenced to death by court martial because he declines to murder. The man who actually murders in civilian clothes gets a better opportunity of justice and fair play than the man who has declined to murder on the battlefield. That seems to me the whole point of our Amendment and I do trust, in spite of what the Minister of Air has said, that the House will seize the point in our Amendment.

Sir ERNEST POLLOCK: I venture to intervene for a few moments on this im-
portant question, because I think I should give the Committee some information which may be of service to it in coming to a conclusion on the merits of the Amendment. I suppose that in all quarters of the Committee we are concerned and, indeed, very anxious, that we should have a system established whereby an efficient system of appeal is opened to those who are sentenced by court martial. Indeed, if I had the information, and only the information which appears to prevail in some quarters of the Committee, I think I should be earnestly endeavouring to press upon the Minister in charge of this Bill that something like a further system of appeal should be granted to those who have been sentenced. The reason why I venture to intervene is that I feel that I can give, if the Committee will allow me, some information on this point which may remove misgivings. The appeal which is made to the Secretary of State is one which is of great moment arid great force and constantly used in favour of the man. The Secretary of State, after the matter has been considered by the Judge Advocate-General, has the opportunity of considering the case, and it is, in fact, reconsidered afresh. During the course of the War my predecessors who held the office of Attorney-General agreed that all the appeals which went to the Secretary of State should be submitted to the Attorney-General, and when I held the office of Attorney-General I was still carrying out the duty of helping to advise the Secretary of State in these cases which came before him.

Mr. HARRIS: Is that provided for by Act of Parliament, or is it only administrative action?

Sir E. POLLOCK: What he did was to invite the assistance of the Attorney-General after the Judge Advocate-General. It must be remembered that the class of cases which came up for appeal are not limited to cases of the death sentence. Please do not imagine that the matters which have to be dealt with are always matters for the extreme penalty of the law. Many cases which have to be considered by court martial are matters of much less importance, involving much less serious punishment. But where they involve serious breach of discipline, or serious punishment, there is an appeal and it is open to be exercised. I have
been struck by the number of cases in which every opportunity has been given to the person against whom sentence has been given, and also by the manner in which clemency has been exercised by the Judge Advocate-General and the Secretary of State. Let us disabuse our minds of thinking that we are dealing with bad cases or of the extreme penalty only. On the contrary, under British justice, which prevails in the Army as everywhere else, an opportunity is given to try to mitigate the punishment, and often the imposition of any penalty in the system that has to be worked. The Amendments suggest that all these cases should go to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

Mr. R. DAVIES: Only if they please.

Sir E. POLLOCK: Let us consider what an appeal before the Court of Criminal Appeal is. It is an appeal in respect to which the decision can be reviewed and is reviewed in all cases which take place in this country. No confirmation from me is necessary of the words of the Air Minister that such cases brought before the War for a long period were very few. We have to take the exceptional cases which occurred in the wider and more distant parts of the Empire. In all these cases there is a standing system of appeal. Further, confirmation has to be given of the sentence by an adequate and important military authority. Do not imagine that that is a matter of course. It is a very serious step which has to be carried out effectively, and has to be carried out to the full. Then, after that, confirmation, the case is considered by the Judge Advocate-General. The present Judge Advocate-General who is well known to many of us in this House, is a man of great ability, who rendered great service to the country in the early part of the War; a man whose judgment all Members of this House have confidence in. The sentence has to be confirmed by him. I say from my experience of the Court of Criminal Appeal that the working of the system now prevailing in military circles is really more favourable to the men who are punished than any system which could be established by means of going to the Court of Appeal. I have spoken longer than I intended, because I was anxious that the Committee should have such information as was at my disposal to re-assure them
that the present system is one about which they need have no disquiet—that the great spirit of British justice which prevails in all Courts does prevail, and work in favour of those who are punished from time to time under the military system.

Mr. G. SPENCER: Everything the right hon. and learned Gentleman who has just sat down says on a question of this character is always worthy of the most serious attention of this House, but there are two points of view from which hon. Members approach the subject. Unless an appeal is granted to an ordinary soldier, he is looked upon as being of less regard and concern than the common criminal who is guilty of the grossest crime that could be committed.

Sir E. POLLOCK: There is a right of appeal; it is not a question of an appeal being granted in certain cases.

Mr. SPENCER: What I gather from the Minister in charge is that there are three stages and the sentence has to be confirmed. By whom has it to be confirmed? The right hon. Gentleman does not say by whom. So far as the man himself is concerned, it seems to me he has no right of appeal to a properly constituted tribunal. My right hon. and learned Friend (Sir E. Pollock) has had a legal training and the hon. and gallant Member for Melton (Sir C. Fate) has been more or less a soldier. If a case were presented in which my right hon. Friend was present, he would approach it with a legal mind, but if my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Melton were dealing with the case, he would approach it from the military point of view, more or less with the prejudice of the soldier—he could not escape it—and he would approach it from the point of view of how it affected the Army and not how it, affected the person. So far as any military tribunal is concerned, I do not say the General has less regard for the soldier, or that he is not actuated by the highest possible motives, but what I do say is that he does not bring the same judicial mind to bear upon the question as would a tribunal constituted like the Court of Appeal.

Sir E. POLLOCK: Perhaps I did not make my meaning clear. In the case of a death sentence that has to go before a General Court Martial and that is the very highest Military Court composed of
officers of high rank. It goes from them to a man who is legally trained, the Judge Advocate-General, for confirmation, after the General Court Martial has dealt with it.

Mr. SPENCER: If ever it was proposed in this House that the Courts of Justice of this country should be presided over in the same way as the Courts Martial are presided over, my right hon. Friend and the whole of his legal fraternity would immediately protest against a Court of that character.

Sir S. HOARE: I would now ask that the Committee should come to a decision on this question.

Captain BERKELEY: There is really a point of substance here. I was quite sure that there was some misunderstanding, and I should like to try and clear it up. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the late Attorney-General (Sir E. Pollock) has been talking about the case of general courts martial, That is not the case which is impeached. The case that has been impeached is that of death sentences on active service, and they are passed, not by a General Court Martial, but by a Field General Court Martial, which is quite mother matter. It is composed of the best officers of Field and lower rank that can be summoned together for the purpose by the convening officer, who, as a rule, is a Brigadier-General. Then there is an important point in connection with the confirmation. The right hon. Member for Che[...]sea (Sir Samuel Hoare) says that

the first safeguard of the accused person is the confirming officer, who—I quote from memory—is usually an officer of Field rank or a Brigadier-General. The confirming officer is nominally a Brigadier-General, but he may, in certain cases, be an officer of Field rank. There are difficult legal points on which he has to satisfy himself, namely, whether evidence of a nature prejudicial to the accused has been wrongfully admitted, whether the accused has been unduly restricted in his defence, whether the charge is bad in law, and whether there has been any departure from rules of procedure by which an injustice has been done. I submit that those are highly technical points which, without in any way criticising senior officers, require considerable legal knowledge for their determination. The case then goes to the Judge-Advocate-General Overseas, and the man has the right of petition to His Majesty. I am not really sure that he has this right in eases of sentence on active service; but in that event it may come before the Secretary of State, who calls in the Attorney-General. It is not always that the case of a death sentence comes before the Secretary of State, because the man does not always know that he has the right to petition, and I am sure that the right hon. and learned Gentleman would not contend that it did.

Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 127; Noes, 201.

Division No. 97.]
AYES.
[10.37 a.m.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Dunnico, H.
Irving, Dan


Ammon, Charles George
Ede, James Chuter
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Fairbairn, R. R.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Batey, Joseph
Foot, Isaac
Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Gosling, Harry
Jones, J. J. (West Ham. Silvertown)


Berke'ey, Captain Reginald
Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Bonwick, A.
Greenall, T.
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)


Bowdler, W. A.
Greenwood, A, (Nelson and Colne)
Jowett, W. A. (The Hartlepools)


Briant, Frank
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.


Broad, F. A.
Griffith, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Kanyon, Barnet


Bromfield, William
Groves, T.
Kirkwood, D.


Brothurton, J.
Grundy, T. W.
Lansbury, George


Buchanan, G.
Guest, J. (York, W. R., Hemsworth)
Lawson, John James


Buckle, J.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Leach, W.


Burgess, S.
Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lee, F.


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Linfield, F. C.


Cairns, John
Hancock, John George
Lunn, William


Cape, Thomas
Harbord, Arthur
MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)


Charleton, H. C.
Hardie, George D.
M'Entee, V. L.


Collison, Lavi
Harris, Percy A.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)


Darbishlre, C. W.
Hayday, Arthur
March, S.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Maxton, James


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Middleton, G.


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Herrlotts, J.
Morrison. H. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Duffy, T, Gavan
Hirst, G. H.
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)


Newbold, J. T. W.
Shaw, Thomas (Preston)
Webb, Sidney


O'Grady, Captain James
Shinwell, Emanuel
Westwood J.


Oliver, George Harold
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wheatley, J.


Paling, W.
Simpson, J. Hope
White, Charles F. (Derby, Western}


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Sitch, Charles H.
White, H. G. (Birkenhead, E.)


Phillipps, Vivian
Smith, T. (Pontefract)
Whiteley, W.


Potts, John S.
Snell, Harry
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Pringle, W. M. R.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Steven, Campbell
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Riley, Ben
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Ritson, J.
Sturrock, J. Long
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Roberts, C. H. (Derby)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wright, W.


Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Robinson, W. C. (York, Elland)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)



Saklatvata, S.
Tout, W. J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Salter, Dr. A.
Turner, Ben
Mr. John Robertson and Mr. Morgan Jones.


Sexton, James
Warne, G. H.



Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)
Watts-Morgan, Lieut.-Colonel D.



NOES.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honiton)


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Murchison, C. K.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Eyres Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Newman, Colonel I. R. P. (Finchley)


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Falcon, Captain Michael
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfray
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen, J. (Westminster)


Astor, J. J. (Kent. Dover)
Fawkes, Major F. H,
Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Ford, Patrick Johnston
Nield, Sir Herbert


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Foreman, Sir Henry
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh


Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.
Forestier-Walker, L.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Banks, Mitchell
Foxcrott, Captain Charles Talbot
Paget, T. G.


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Furness, G. J.
Parker, Owen (Kettering)


Barnston, Major Harry
Ganzoni, Sir John
Pease, William Edwin


Becker, Harry
Garland, C. S.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque


Bellairs, Commander Cariyon W.
Gates, Percy
Penny, Frederick George


Bennett. Sir T. J. (Sevenoaks)
Goff, Sir R. Park
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Gould, James C.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Berry, Sir George
Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Perring, William George


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.)
Philipson, Hilton


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Pielou, D. P.


Blundell, F. N.
Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Pollock, Rt. Hon. Sir Ernest Murray


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Gwynne, Rupert S.
Pownall, Lieut. Colonel Assheton


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Preston, Sir W. R.


Brass, Captain W.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Privett, F. J.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hall, Rr-Adml Sir W.(Liv'p'l.W.D'by)
Raeburn, Sir William H.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Halstead, Major O.
Raine, W.


Briggs, Harold
Hamilton, Sir George C. (Altrincham)
Rankin, Captain James Stuart


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Poet


Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Harrison, F. C.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.


Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Harvey, Major S. E.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bruford, R.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Bruton, Sir James
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Reynolds, W. G. W.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Herbert, Col. Hon. A. (Yeovil)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)


Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Hiley, Sir Ernest
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S, J. G.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. Sir S. (Ecclesall)


Burn, Colonel Sir Charles Rosdew
Hogg,Rt. Hon.Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Butler, J. R. U. (Cambridge Univ.)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ruggles-Brise, Major E.


Button, H. S.
Hood, Sir Joseph
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cadogan, Major Edward
Hopkins, John W. W.
Russell, William (Bolton)


Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W: R.
Howard, Capt, D. (Cumberland, N.)
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Cot. C. K.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hudson, Capt. A.
Sanders. Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hurst, Lieut.-Colonel Gerald B.
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)
Sandon, Lord


Clarry, Reginald George
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Clayton, G. C.
Jarrett, G. W. S.
Shepperson, E. W.


Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.
Kelley, Major Fred (Rotherham)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)


Colfox, Major Win. Phillips
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Smith, Sir Harold (Wavertree)


Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cope, Major William
Law, Rt. Hon. A. B. (Glasgow, C.)
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. M.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.
Stanley, Lord


Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Steel, Major S. Strang


Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)
Lorimer, H. D,
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Dalziel, Sir D. (Lambeth, Brixton)
Lumley, L. R.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Sutcliffe, T.


Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)
Maddacks, Henry
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Manville, Edward
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Doyle, N. Grattan
Margesson, H. D. R.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Du Pre, Colonel William Baring
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Tubbs, S. W.


Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


England, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Waring, Major Walter




Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)
Wise, Frederick
Yerburgh, B. D. T.


Wells, S. R.
Wolmer, Viscount



Weston, Colonel John Wakefield
Wood, Major Sir S. Hill- (High Peaky)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Whaler, Col. Granville C. H.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel


White, Lt.-Col. G. D. (Southport)
Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward
Gibbs


Winterton, Earl

The CHAIRMAN: Several new Clauses have been handed in in manuscript: It is, as the Committee knows, my duty to select new Clauses or Amendments for discussion, and I do not look with favour upon proposals handed in in manuscript that might have been put on the Paper, but there are two of a very simple character which I am disposed to favour. The first is one in the name of the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Morgan Jones), but unfortunately it is not consistent with Clause 5, which has already been passed. He will, however, be enabled, subject, of course, to what Mr. Speaker may say, to move the substance of that Amendment on Report. The other is in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Central Nottingham (Captain Berkeley).

Captain BENN: On a point of Order. May I draw your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the peculiar hardship that falls on us owing to the procedure adopted by the Government? I am not complaining, but merely pointing it out. In the ordinary course, I myself had an Amendment which I desired to move, if it were selected, but supposing it were not selected, I would have desired to move it on Report, but it must be—in fact, practically all Amendments to this Bill must be—in the form of new Clauses, and on the Report stage a new Clause cannot be moved unless notice is given, but the Government will not give us the chance to give notice, because they are taking the Report stage immediately after the Committee stage, and therefore I suggest to you that you should look considerately on Amendments handed in in manuscript.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I do not think the hon. and gallant Member means to complain of the action of the Government, because, as a matter of fact, we did our best to meet the convenience of hon. Members, but the proposal to which we were prepared to agree met with no support from the benches opposite. It would not, therefore, be fair to impute any blame to us for the fact that this new Clause may not be able to be put on Report. We do not want, however, to deprive the hon. and gallant Member
of having this provision, once and for all, making field punishment No. 1 illegal on the face of it, and if there is any difficulty on Report, I will consult with my Noble. Friend the Secretary of State and see if he can put it in in another place.

Captain BENN: I should like to say that, provided it is understood, as I understand it is, that field punishment No. 1 is now to be statutorily illegal, and not a matter of rules and regulations, I am quite content, and I should not think of taking up the time of the Committee by moving my Amendment now. I understand that it will be done by the Government in another place, and I thank the hon. and gallant Gentleman.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Repeal of Section 49.)

Section 49 of the Army Act is hereby repealed.—[Captain Captain Berkeley.]

Brought up, and. read the First time.

Captain BERKELEY: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
Section 49 of the Army Act is the Section which provides for what are know as field general courts martial, and as far as I can trace the history of this particular kind of tribunal, it was introduced in the Act of 1893. This particular Section was put in that Act for the purpose of combining a form of procedure for trying offences committed overseas with the then existing summary procedure or drumhead court martial, as I think it was known. The result of this fusion of practice has been to create a court which functions in the following circumstances. Where a complaint is made to any officer in command of any detachment or portion of troops in any country beyond the seas or to the commanding officer of any corps or portion of a corps on active service, that an offence has been committed by any person subject to military law, then, if in the opinion of such officer it is not practicable for such offence to be tried by the ordinary general court martial, it shall be lawful for him to convene the court martial referred to as a field general court martial.
Just to summarise the kind of tribunal that is created, it is a body of officers of field rank brought together by the convening officer and exercising powers
under special rules of procedure not related, except in one or two special cases, to the general rules of procedure governing courts martial, but exercising the full powers of a general court martial, including the infliction of the penalty of death. I submit for the consideration of the Committee that the state of things which gave rise to the creation of this particular tribunal has now ceased to exist. It is quite obvious that the original field general court martial was intended to meet the case where you had a small detachment of troops engaged in what you might call pioneering a country where there was not the ordinary convenience for obtaining the officers of necessary rank to constitute a general court martial. Of course, the constitution of a drumhead court martial for the summary trial of offences committed on the field of battle is familiar to everyone.
I shall best illustrate what I think is the real objection to this particular form of summary procedure—for, of course, one must recognise that some form of summary procedure is necessary to deal with these circumstances—by reference to a case that has come to my knowledge, of what was a very serious piece of injustice done to a man who is a constituent of mine, after the Armistice, but before the conclusion of peace. This particular man was employed in the Inland Water Transport. I have very little doubt that he was a bit of a "sea lawyer," as it is called, and I have no doubt that he caused certain annoyance to his immediate superiors, the non-commissioned officers in whose charge he was. I think he prided himself rather on a greater knowledge than they possessed of King's Regulations and other rights and privileges, and I am inclined to think his superiors were out to "do" for him.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: On a point of Order. Is it in order for the hon. Member for Richmond (Mr. Becker) and others to carry on a loud conversation the whole time that the hon. and gallant Member for Central Nottingham is addressing the Committee?

Mr. BECKER: On that point of Order I was certainly talking in rather a loud voice, but I was calling attention to the fact that the Members of the front Opposition bench were exchanging very loud conversation among themselves.

The CHAIRMAN: I was not aware of any individual talking particularly loudly, because there was such a general hum of conversation in the Committee. Perhaps hon. Members who have private confidences to exchange will do so in a lower tone.

Captain BERKELEY: I am sure there is no one who, if I can show a substantial injustice, would be more sympathetic towards having it put right than the hon. Member for Richmond (Mr. Becker). The particular man I had in mind was brought up one day charged with the perfectly trivial offence of trying to "wangle" an extra tin of condensed milk. It sounds a preposterous thing to bring to the notice of the House of Commons, but hon. Members will perhaps agree with me, later on, that there is reason for it. He was brought before his O.C., and was deprived of 21 days' pay. He refused to accept the award. He was told he had better accept it, as they did not want all the trouble of convening a court-martial to try such a trivial offence but he persisted that he was entitled, as he was, to a court-martial. Therefore, they called together a court-martial, who met and sentenced him to 28 days' field punishment No. 2, for the perfectly trivial offence of trying to "wangle" an additional tin of condensed milk. The man served his term of imprisonment.
The medical evidence showed that for some time he had been suffering from some defect in his feet which made him unable to march. When he was released from his field punishment, he was told by his non-commissioned officer to march and embark for a certain port. He said he was unable to march. He was told he must march, whereupon he said: "You had better take me to the guardroom; I cannot march." They court-martialled him again, charging him with disobedience of an order, and sentenced him to three years' penal servitude. The confirming officer reduced that sentence to six months' hard labour. The man was imprisoned. He asked to be allowed to appeal. He was told he must wait a certain time before his appeal could be forwarded. It was eventually forwarded, and the Director-General of Lines of Communication immediately remitted the punishment to 28 days' field punishment No. 2, which had already been served. What happened? The papers were lost, the man was sent from one gaol to another,
and was finally taken, like a winkle out of its shell, out of the gaol at Nottingham. [An HON. MEMBER: "Who had the milk?"] I am very sorry to find that an hon. Member treats the matter as a joke, because I do not consider it funny at all. The man served four and a half months' imprisonment with hard labour, when his sentence had been reduced to 28 days' field punishment.
11.0 A.M.
Now comes the immediate connection of this story with my proposed new Clause. On behalf of this man, an appeal was made to the Government for special consideration, and I want to make it plain at the outset that I am not attacking the Government at all, or rather the late Government. The Government of the day were most generous. After a full investigation, the Army Council apologised, and the Government paid the man £350 compensation, but in the course of the proceedings these points were put forward on behalf of the man as reasons why the Government should take a favourable view of his case, and the Government did not take a favourable view of his case at all on account of these considerations, but from quite different considerations. The first consideration was this: Under the rules of procedure governing general courts-martial, an accused person is entitled—and it seems the most elementary justice that he should be entitled—to have a copy of the summary of evidence delivered to him in time to prepare his defence, and is entitled to be told the names of the witnesses to be called against him. That was one ground on which this man's case was put forward. With regard to that, it was replied, and replied perfectly correctly—I am not impugning the correctness of the reply—that that rule does not apply to the case of a field general court-martial, and though wherever possible effect is given to that rule of procedure there is nothing to compel the convening authority who brings the man to trial to give the man a summary of evidence. The next point is that under the rules of procedure governing general courts martial the accused is entitled to be defended by an officer. He is entitled to the assistance of counsel or a solicitor or an officer. This man applied to be defended by an officer. It was not found convenient, and that point of appeal also
was rejected, because it was pointed out that the rules of procedure governing field courts martial do not give the accused the right to the assistance of an officer. Those are two specific points on which I would like to ask the Under-Secretary for War for an assurance that some regulation will be laid down, so that in future a man shall be entitled to be defended by an officer before a field general court martial. It ought to be given to the man as a right. It is not sufficient that where possible a summary of evidence should be given to the man. He, ought to have that also as a right. There are other irregularities of procedure with which I will not trouble the Committee and I thank hon. Members for having listened to me with such patience.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: The function of a field general court martial is by no means limited to pioneering wars. Possibly it may have been originally, but in present conditions it is essential that we should have a more summary procedure than the cumbersome method of a district general court martial to deal with cases on active service. Most officers who have served on courts martial will disagree with the hon. and gallant Member in considering a district court martial better than a field general court martial. The President at a district court martial spends nearly all his time filling forms and taking down evidence, and has no time to apply his mind to the evidence, while in the case of a field general court martial all this is simplified. There is no verbatim report taken, but merely a summary. It is a far more businesslike and efficient mode than a district general court martial, certainly on active service. The hon. and gallant Gentleman asked whether we could not provide that an officer should be available to defend the accused before a field general court martial. It is a matter of universal practice already for a man to be defended by an officer if he asks for it and if an officer is available.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Cannot you make the practice the law?

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: I am told that you will add nothing to the rights enjoyed by the accused if that were put into the rules. The summary of evidence, in the same way, is always given to the accused if it is taken, but there are occasions when it is impossible to take it;
Field general courts-martial have sometimes to take place when troops are marching through enemy country, when perhaps there is a crime committed against the civil population by a force on the march. It is sometimes essential for courts to sit at once, and sometimes it occurs that there is no opportunity for a

SCHEDULE.


Accommodation to be provided.
Maximum Price.


Lodging and attendance for soldier where meals furnished
Tenpence per night for the first soldier and eightpence per night for each additional soldier.


Breakfast as specified in Part I of the Second Schedule to the Army and Air Force Acts.
Sevenpence each.


Dinner as so specified
Eightpence.


Supper as so specified
Threepence.


Where no meals furnished, lodging and attendance, and candles, vinegar, salt, and the use of fire, and the necessary utensils for dressing and eating his meat.
Tenpence per night for the first soldier and eightpence per night for each additional soldier.


Stable room and ten pounds of oats, twelve pounds of hay, and eight pounds of straw per day for each horse.
One shilling and ninepence per day.


Stable room without forage
Sixpence per day.


Lodging and attendance for officer
Three shillings per night.


NOTE.—An officer shall pay for his food.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I beg to move in the paragraph beginning "Dinner as so specified" to leave out the word "eightpence," and to insert instead thereof the words "one shilling."
I have sat here for twelve hours waiting patiently for an opportunity to move this Amendment. In the schedule there is every year inserted a list of prices to be paid to innkeepers, and others who have soldiers billeted on them, for meals supplied to soldiers. The scale of prices for dinner and supper is insufficient. For instance the amount allowed for a dinner to a soldier, consisting of 1 lb. of meat before cooking, 8 ozs. of bread with vegetables and a pint of beer or mineral waters, is eightpence. These cannot be adequately provided for a soldier for eightpence. It may be urged that we do not want innkeepers to make a profit out of soldiers billeted on them, though if they did sometimes it would be for the greater comfort of the soldier. A second Amendment, which I have put down, deals with the price to be paid for supper supplied to a soldier. Their supper consists of 6 ozs. of bread, with one pint of tea with milk and sugar, and 2 ozs. of cheese according to the Schedule to the Act, and all that an inn-
summary of evidence, and it would not be consistent with justice if it were laid down as a hard and fast rule that in all cases a summary of evidence should be taken. I am unable to accept the Amendment.

Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time," put, and negatived.

keeper or other person supplying the meal is allowed for it is the sum of 3d. This is wholly inadequate, and I trust that the Committee will accept the Amendment.

Mr. GWYNNE: Perhaps I may be able to give the hon. and gallant Gentleman some small comfort for his long wait, though I cannot give all that he wants. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is wrong in saying that beer is included in the dinner. Though the figures which he has mentioned seem very meagre, yet it has been the immemorial custom to billet men on innkeepers at cost price. Profit has never been taken into account, and it would be very difficult at the present time, when economy is so necessary, to drop that principle. But it seems to me that the prices have been cut very close, and that exception may be taken to these figures, and that, instead of eightpence, tenpence should be allowed for dinner, and that an extra penny should be allowed for the price of supper. If we once give away the principles to which I have referred, and allow profit to the inn-keeper on the transaction, we would be opening a very wide door, not at the present moment, but in case of war. At present there are certain restrictions, the
limit being three men for two nights. There has been no protest from innkeepers with regard to billeting. This extra threepence a day will be allowed, not as profit, but merely to cover variation in different parts of the country and the increase in prices.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: If the hon. Gentleman will move the necessary alteration I will withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: Leave out the word "eightpence," and insert, instead thereof, the word "tenpence."—[Mr. Gwynne.]

Further Amendment made: In paragraph beginning "Supper as so specified," leave out the word "threepence," and insert, instead thereof, the word "fourpence."—[Mr. Gwynne.]

Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Preamble agreed to.

Bill reported, with Amendments.

Bill as amended, considered.

CLAUSE 5.—(Amendment of Sections 76 and 82.)

(1) In Section seventy-six of the Army Act (which prescribes the limit of original enlistment), the words "or classes of cases" shall be inserted after the word "cases" the words "a boy" shall be substituted for the words "any boy"; and the words "in a particular corps" shall be omitted.

(2) At the end of Sub-section (2) of Section eighty-two of the Army Act (which relates to appointments to corps) the following proviso shall be inserted:

"Provided that in the case of a boy enlisted for general service before attaining the age of eighteen, he need not be appointed to a particular corps until he attains that age."

Mr. MORGAN JONES: I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words
the words 'or classes of cases' shall be inserted after the word 'cases'; the words 'a boy' shall be substituted for the words 'any boy'; and the words 'in a particular corps' shall be omitted,
and to insert instead thereof the words
there shall be inserted after the word 'person' where that word first occurs the words 'over the age of twenty-one' and the proviso shall be omitted.
Briefly, the point of my Amendment is this. As the hon. and gallant Member in charge of the Bill is aware, I have on
more than one occasion had to bring to his notice the question of the enlistment of youths of tender years in the Army. It is not generally known, I think, to Members of this House that the age at which boys may be enlisted into the Army without the consent of their parents is not 18, but 17, and the purpose I have in view is to see to it that there shall be an age established in this Act by means of the Amendment which I have suggested, whereby persons of tender years shall not be so enlisted without the consent of their parents. I think everyone will agree it is most undesirable that boys of tender years should be allowed, as the result of the caprice of a moment, or, perhaps, some other cause, to change the course of their career, quite contrary to the anticipations and desires of their parents. That is the pith and purpose of my Amendment.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I beg to second the Amendment. I think a large number of Members in this House were under the impression that the age of enlistment in the Army was 18. I found, not long after I became a Member of Parliament, from letters from various constituents of mine regarding their sons, that the age was 17, and when the Secretary of State for War was approached, he refused, even where the boys joined in defiance of the wishes of their parents, to make any allowance for them. It was the general impression, and accepted in this country, that 18 was the age, and I think, therefore, the Government ought to meet this Amendment in the spirit in which it is moved.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: It is quite impossible for the Government to accept the Amendment, for the reason that we do not recruit any considerable proportion of men at or over the age of 21. If we were to accept this Amendment, it would mean a complete standstill in recruiting for the Army. At the present time, more than half our recruits are between the ages of 18 and 19. In addition to that, we must take boys to train them for trades. We cannot hope to fill up the more skilled ranks in the Army if we only get them in at the age of 21.

Mr. LAWSON: You are taking boys at 17, and keeping them.

Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESS: We take them at 18, and the rule is that if they give a false answer on attestation, and get in younger, we release them if under
17, and they joined without their parents' consent. If they are between 17 and 18, we only release them if there are strong compassionate grounds—the need of the family for the earning powers of the boy, or if the parents repay to the State the out-of-pocket expenses of the training. The cost of the boy getting out varies with the time he has been in the Army, and it would be quite impossible, consistent with reason, to waive this rule. The alternative is to have no one under 21. We cannot help getting these boys if they give a wrong answer, unless we always insist on a birth certificate, and that would make recruiting very difficult indeed. I am sorry I cannot accept this Amendment or make any change in the present practice, which is one of long standing in the Army, and is absolutely necessary.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: It seems to me that there is involved here a question of principle. If there be an objection at all to the Army, it is an objection all the time. If there be, as I have always understood, particularly from this side of the House, a strengthening of support of the principle of conscientious objection to the taking of life, it ought to be on the distinct basis of thoroughly discouraging anyone from entering upon an occupation which is admitted to have a deleterious effect on the man joining it. Anyone who knows anything about the occupation of the Army, knows perfectly well that it is not to the interest of any young man to enter upon it. [HON. MEMBERS: "No" and "Yes."] The influences at work in the training applicable to that particular machine are such, that it is considered to be absolutely essential to instil into the young man all the ferocity that the animal instinct can produce. Hon. Members on the other side smile, because they have never realised properly the devastation involved by the sustenance of such a machine, I am going into no Lobby on the question of age. I am going to stand for the principle, which, I maintain, has proved its efficacy in this country and other nations. It unquestionably comes under the scoffs and jeers of those who talk about the necessity of war to end war. The conditions upon which our country is conducted, commercially, economically and otherwise, go to prove that the forces are of a selfish character, and that the young life
of this and other nations has been employed for the most sordid purposes that the world has ever known. I stand here to-day, as I stood during the late War, and during the South African War, by the man who goes frankly before a tribunal and declares that he believes this thing to be an evil, a powerful agency for the destruction of mankind, and that there is no other course which can be attempted whereby resistance can be made to these evil agencies, than the courage, perseverance and determination of the individual who says, "I will face the guns, and be shot down, rather than go into such a machine."

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY/: Then why were you not here all night?

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: My answer to that is that I have been discharging services in connection with this House in ways which are not, perhaps, so open to publicity. I have been undergoing experiences which are undermining my health. It is not a question of entitlement to the Victoria Cross, because you happen to stay here and sleep during the night. If absent during the night, I am all the more fresh for tackling you this morning. To be on the ground does not settle anything. It is a question of how determined you are in pursuit of your principles. I submit that if we are going to have a real issue of pacifism, we must declare ourselves prepared to stand for it.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is now travelling away from the Amendment.

Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEE: He is too fresh.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: On this question it seems to me that you determine an age after which a thing, which is objectionable, becomes acceptable. I say age is no determining factor in this at all. The representative of the Government says, quite rightly from their standpoint, that they take the boys in at the earliest possible age. I have known cases where parents have had a desperate struggle to get their loved ones out of the clutches of the Army fiends. I know that this is a question which has not yet had a fair chance. During the War there was difficulty in getting fair consideration for it. But things are different now. For parents and young men there is only one
Commandment, "Thou shall not kill." That is the Commandment in the Book from which the chaplain reads every day. If there is any realistic meaning in the Book, let us prove ourselves to be honourable Members of this House and stand by the principle.

Mr. J. JONES: Some of us, at least, have never agreed that there is a possibility of peace merely by shouting "peace." I am prepared to fight for the principles in which I believe. If anybody stands in the way of the realisation of the objects that we have in view, I, for one, am prepared to fight. I object to the kind of silent manslaughter that is taking place to-day. Thousands of the children of my class are being murdered every day under peace conditions. So far as this Amendment enables parents to have some control over the lives of their children, I agree with it, but anybody who gets up in this House and talks about universal peace knows as well as I do that he is talking through the back of his neck. What I cannot understand is that the man who objects to military service, at the same time believes in compulsion when it is a matter of individual habit. You cannot eat your cake and have it. If you are to have compulsion in one direction, you must have it in another. Will the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Scrymgeour) say that, in the event of this country being attacked, supposing that a Labour Government, or even a Prohibition Government, were in power, he would put forward the pacifist plea, and would not defend the country? I am not arguing for one kind of Government as

against another. Every country has the right to go to hell in its own way.

What we ask is that at least there should be an age limit for Army service, a recognition of the principle that a boy shall not be allowed to join the Army, even of his own volition, at too early an age, and a recognition of parental control up to a certain point. I am in favour of peace; I want peace. Everybody wants peace except the professional soldier. We have nothing to gain by war; we have lost everything through it. We are not responsible for the Bible being on the Table. The chaplain reads from it every day and draws a salary for so doing. But the principle contained in that Book is not being acted upon. That is not our fault. We hope that when we get the opportunity the principles in that Book will be acted upon. In the meantime we have to face the music, and the music is that we are discussing a Bill which allows boys to join the Army, even without their parents' consent, which allows them to become trained for purposes altogether foreign to the moral principles which we pretend to advocate. Nobody objects to a boy wanting a career. We regret that such careers are necessary or desirable or possible. We want to protect the boy against himself. We have children of our own and we know how they might be led away by the man who waves the Union Jack in the face of the Union Jackasses. I say that quite deliberately.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 222; Noes, 98.

Division No. 98]
AYES
[11.40 a.m.


Ainsworth, Captain Charles
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.


Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)
Brass, Captain W.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Colvin, Brig.-General Richard Beale


Archer-Shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin
Briant, Frank
Cope, Major William


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Cotts, Sir William Dingwall Mitchall


Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)
Brittain, Sir Harry
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.


Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence
Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)
Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brown, J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Crook, C. W. (East Ham, North)


Banbury, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.
Bruford, R.
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Banks, Mitchell
Bruton, Sir James
Dalziel, Sir D. (Lambeth, Brixton)


Barlow, Rt. Hon. Sir Montague
Buckingham, Sir H.
Darbishire, C. W.


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.
Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)


Barnston, Major Harry
Burn, Colonel Sir Charles Rosdew
Davies, Alfred Thomas (Lincoln)


Becker, Harry
Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)
Davies, S. C. (Denbigh, Denbigh)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Cadogan, Major Edward
Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)


Bennett, Sir T. J. (Sevenoaks)
Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Doyle, N. Grattan


Berkeley, Captain Reginald
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Dudgeon, Major C. H.


Berry, Sir George
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Chapple, W. A.
Ellis, R. G.


Bowdler, w. A.
Clayton, G. C.
England, Lieut.-Colonel A.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith


Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Roberts. Rt. Hon. Sir S. (Ecclesall)


Erskine-Bolst, Captain C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)


Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.
Law, Rt. Hon. A. B. (Glasgow, C.)
Roundell, Colonel R. F.


Falcon, Captain Michael
Lloyd Greame, Rt. Hon, Sir Philip
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godlray
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Russell, William (Bolton)


Fawkes, Major F. H.
Lorimer, H. D.
Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney


Foot, Isaac
Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Ford, Patrick Johnston
Lumley, L. R.
Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.


Foreman, Sir Henry
McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)
Sanderson, Sir Frank B.


Forestier-Walker. L.
Maddocks, Henry
Sandon, Lord


Foxcroft, Captain Charles Talbot
Malone, Major P. B. (Tottenham, S.)
Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)


Frece, Sir Walter de
Manville, Edward
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Furness, G. J.
Margesson, H. D. R.
Shepperson, E. W.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Millar, J. D.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Garland, C. S.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw
Simpson, J. Hope


Gates, Percy
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Smith, Sir Allan M. (Cloydon, South)


Goff, Sir R. Park
Molson, Major John Elsdale
Smith, Sir Harold (Wavertree)


Gould, James C.
Moreing, Captain Algernon H.
Somerville. A. A. (Windsor)


Gray, Frank (Oxford)
Morrison-Bell, Major A. C. (Honlton)
Spender-Clay, Lieut.-Colonel H. H.


Gray, Harold (Cambridge)
Murchison, C. K.
Stanley, Lord


Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hackn'y, N.)
Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)
Steel, Major S. Strang


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. O. L. (Exeter)
Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.


Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton-


Gwynne, Rupert S.
Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)
Sturrock, J. Leng


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hall, Rr-Adml Sir W. (Li'p'l,W.D"by)
Mold, Sir Herbert
Sutcliffe, T.


Haistead, Major D.
Norton-Griffiths, Lieut.-Col. Sir John
Terrell, Captain R. (Oxford, Henley)


Hamilton, Sir George C (Altrincham)
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Thornton, M.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Paget, T. G.
Titchfield, Marquess of


Harbord, Arthur
Parker, Owen (Kettering)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Banner, Sir John S. Harmood-
Pease, William Edwin
Tubbs, S. W.


Harrison, F. C.
Pennefather, De Fonblanque
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Penny, Frederick George
Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Waring, Major Walter


Herbert, S. (Scarborough)
Perring, William George
Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)


Hiley, Sir Ernest
Phillipps, Vivian
Wells, S. R.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Bt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Philipson, Hilton
Weston, Colonel John Wakefield


Hogg, Rt. Hon.Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Pielou, D. P.
Wheler, Col. Granville C. H.


Hohier, Gerald Fitzroy
Preston, Sir W. S.
White, Col. G D. (Southport)


Hood, Sir Joseph
Pringle, W. M. R.
Winterton, Earl


Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.)
Raeburn, Sir William H.
Wise, Frederick


Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.
Raine, W.
Wolmer, Viscount


Hudson, Capt. A.
Rankin, Captain James Stuart
Wood, Major M. M. (Aberdeen, C.)


Hughes, Collingwood
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Wood, Maj. Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Hume, G. H.
Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Hurst, Lt.-Col. Gerald Berkeley
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward


Hutchison, G. A. C (Midlothian, N.)
Rentoul, G. S.
Yerburgh, R. D. T.


Jarrett, G. W. S.
Reynolds, W. G. W.
Young, Rt. Hon. E. K. (Norwich)


Jodrell. Sir Neville Paul
Rhodes, Lieut.-Col. J. P.



Johnstone, Harcourt (Willesden, East)
Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Jowitt, W. A. (The Hartiepools)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.


NOES.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
March, S.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hancock, John George
Maxton, James


Bonn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hardie, George O.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottennum, N.)


Broad, F. A.
Harris, Percy A.
Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)


Bromfield, William
Hayday, Arthur
Newbold. I. T. W.


Brotherton, J.
Hayes, John Henry (Edge Hill)
Oliver, George Harold


Buchanan, G.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Buckle, J.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Potts, John S.


Burgess, S.
Harriotts, J.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Buxton, Charles (Accrington)
Hirst, G. H.
Robertson, J.- (Lanark, Bothwell)


Cape, Thomas
Irving, Dan
Robinson, W. C. (York, Elland)


Charleton, H. C.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Saklatvala, S.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Salter, Dr. A.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sexton, James


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Shaw, Thomas (Preston)


Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)
Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)
Shinwell, Emanuel


Duffy, T. Gavan
Kenworthy, Lieut.-Commander J. M.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dunnico, H.
Kenyon, Barnet
Sitch, Charles H.


Ede, James Chuter
Kirkwood, D.
Smith, T. (Pontefract)


Edmonds, G.
Lansbury, George
Snell, Harry


Gosling, Harry
Lawson, John James
Spencer, George A, (Broxtowe)


Greenall, T.
Leach, W.
Stephen, Campbell


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lee, F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Linfield, F. C.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lunn, William
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Groves, T.
MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Grundy T W.
M'Entee, V. L.
Tout, W. J.


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
McLaren, Andrew
Walsh, Stephen (Lancaster, Ince)




Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Whiteley, W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Webb, Sidney
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)



Welsh, J. C.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Westwood, J.
Wilson, R. I. (Jarrow)
Mr. Morgan Jones and Mr. Ammon.


White, Charles F. (Derby, Western)
Wright, W.



Bill read the Third time, and passed.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Mr. THOMAS: Early this morning I stated to hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House that the Opposition had decided to take the unusual course of not exercising their rights on a Bill of this kind, but of endeavouring to help the Government in the latter part of the week out of some of their difficulties. You, Sir, have now put from the Chair the Question that this Bill be read the Third time. There are on these benches dozens of Members who feel an obligation to their constituents, and who feel that on the Third Reading of this Bill they would be sadly lacking in their duty if they did not inform the House of their true feelings on the matter. But we started with a view to being conciliatory and helping the Government. Further, it has been in many respects a unique Debate. We have not only no complaint, but we had nothing but thanks and appreciation for the courtesy and good temper displayed all round. You, Mr. Speaker, have been absent and are unaware that there have been two incidents. One was the loss of one of my colleagues, who is now restored. A more serious point is that at 12 o'clock last night an Amendment was moved with a view to doing justice to officers of the British Army. We profoundly disagree in many things with the gentlemen who moved and seconded the Amendment, but we felt that here was an occasion when they were right. We continued the Debate. We pleaded their cause. At 1.30 this morning we divided. From that moment until an hour ago we lost all trace of the gentlemen who moved that Amendment. Knowing the long and distinguished military career of the seconder we were naturally apprehensive. We said, as a soldier, he would never desert his post. The Mover is more to be excused, because he has not had a long military experience. We are pained beyond words that the great tradition and example of the British Army of sticking to your guns was not maintained in this case, but we are relieved beyond measure
to know that at least no harm has befallen him.

Mr. HURST: The right hon. Gentleman has made some remarks about myself. I should like to explain that I should not have been away had I not been paired. Further, many millions of working people in Lancashire who have been waiting for the Cotton Industry Bill to be debated to-day will know how much they have to thank the Labour Party.

GAS REGULATION ACT, 1920.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the British Gaslight Company, Limited, with respect to the Norwich undertaking of that company, which was presented on the 22nd March and published, be approved." — [Viscount Wolmer.]

NAVY AND ARMY CANTEENS.

Ordered, "That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the circumstances in which the Navy and Army Canteen Board took over the assets and liabilities of the Expeditionary Force canteens and into the amounts, etc., taken over; and to inquire into the conduct, administration, trading accounts, and balance sheets of the Navy and Army Canteen Board since taking over from the Expeditionary Farce canteens."

Sir Frederick Banbury, Lieut.-Colonel Campion, Captain Viscount Curzon, Lieut.-Colonel Hodge, Colonel Sir Arthur Holbrook, Mr. Lawson, Mr. Wardlaw-Milne, Mr. Hugh Morrison, Mr. J. Robertson, Lieut.-Colonel Stephenson, and Mr. Wallhead nominated members of the Committee.

Ordered, "That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records."

Ordered, "That Five be the quorum."— [Colonel Gibbs.]

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE.

Ordered, "That Sir William Raeburn be discharged from the Select Committee."

Ordered, "That Major Boyd-Carpenter be added to the Committee."—[Colonel Gibbs.]

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn till Monday next."—[Colonel Leslie Wilson.]

The remaining Orders were read and postponed.

It being after Half-past Eleven upon Thursday evening, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order, till Monday next, pursuant to the Resolution of the House this day.

Adjourned at Four Minutes before Twelve o'Clock, a.m., Friday, 13th April.